Cibrar^ofCKe'theolojical  ^emmarp 

PRINCETON  • NEW  JERSEY 

-VVV  fff-, 

PRESENTED  BY 

The  Library  of  the 
Board  of  Foreign  Missions  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church  in  the  U.S.A. 

:dss7S 

r?<°8 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2016 


https://archive.org/details/siamscaseforreviOOpitk 


I 


SIAM’S  CASE 


FOR 

REVISION  OF  OBSOLETE  TREATY  OBLIGATIONS 


SIAM’S  CASE 


FOR 

REVISION  OF  OBSOLETE  TREATY  OBLIGATIONS 
ADMITTEDLY  INAPPLICABLE 
TO  PRESENT  CONDITIONS 

, M n r 

Sb  $ /tv  d ^ 0KSm/tf(y*  A 


o 


v 


' > N > 


( 


I. 


On  the  twenty-second  day  of  July,  1917,  Siam  went  to 
war  with  the  German  Empire  and  its  ally,  Austria-Hun- 
gary. Long  previously  in  sympathy  with  the  Allied  cause 
her  declaration  might  have  come  much  sooner  had  it 
not  first  been  necessary  to  safeguard  herself  internally 
against  numerous  enemy  aliens  resident  within  her  bor- 
ders, and  to  find  substitutes  for  essential  technical  men 
of  enemy  nationalities  that  were  in  her  service.  Once 
that  was  accomplished,  her  energies  and  resources  were 
at  the  disposal  of  the  cause  of  justice. 

chose  to  fight  (to  quote  from  the  official 
Communique  of  that  date) 


for  International  Rights  and  for  the  good  of  the  world 
in  general.”  She  conceived  it  her  “duty”  (Royal  Procla- 
mation of  that  date)  “as  one  of  the  members  of  the 
Family  of  Nations,  to  uphold  the  sanctity  of  Interna- 
tional Rights”.  As  she  interpreted  the  purposes  of  her 
Allies  (Royal  Proclamation  issued  on  the  Anniversary  of 
Siam’s  Declaration  of  War)  “their  object  in  carrying  on 
this  war  is  to  uphold  the  independence  of  small  nations 
and  to  maintain  good  relations  between  all  nations 
whether  weak  or  strong,  in  order  that  each  may  be  able  to 
pursue  its  own  path  of  progress  and  the  weak  nations  be 
free  from  all  oppression  on  the  part  of  the  strong.”  With 
such  a cause  to  fight  for,  there  could  be  but  one  course  for 
her. 

Yet  the  war  had  not  touched  Siam.  Half  a world 
still  intervened  between  herself  and  Germany.  More- 
over, she  was  small  and  defenseless,  while  Germany  was 
strong,  as  yet  unconquered,  merciless.  A safer  course 


in&4 


2 


than  the  one  she  chose  was  open  to  her.  Bnt  she  did  not 
hesitate.  To  appreciate  how  strong  was  her  sense  of 
duty,  how  free  from  every  admixture  of  self-interest  or 
self-seeking,  we  must  revert  to  the  circumstances  of  that 
summer,  to  a Germany  still  victorious  in  the  East,  Russia 
crumbling  fast,  a draw  on  the  Western  front.  That  the 
Allies  would  eventually  triumph,  or  even  that  the  issue 
might  be  drawn,  was  at  that  time  none  too  certain.  It 
required  courage  to  fight  for  justice  then,  with  all  the 
implications  of  what  defeat  at  the  hands  of  Germany 
must  surely  mean.  '^jg, 4W,, 

Siam  might  have  stipulate^for  advantages  as  Turkey 
did  before  allying  herself  with  Germany, 

Mfl^as  other  nations  did,  but,  con- 
vinced that  the  cause  was  just,  she  came  in  uncondition- 
ally, pledged  to  do  her  utmost,  without  stint  of  men  or 
resources  insofar  as  she  had  them  to  give.  She  asked  no 
favors,  she  asked  no  material  advantage.  Although  she 
might  have  driven  a bargain  with  those  who  sought  her 
aid,  she  pledged  herself  without  reserve  to  the  cause  of 
the  Allies  and  of  right. 

A small  nation,  without  industrial  resources,  it  was 
not  to  be  expected  that  she  could  offer  much  besides  her 
moral  support.  Moral  support  she  did  give  the  Allied 
cause,  unimpeachable  evidence  of  the  fact  that  there  was 
at  least  one  small  nation  ready  to  believe  in  the  Allied 
championship  of  high  ideals.  But  the  direct  material  as- 
sistance which  she  offered  bulked  far  larger  than  could 
reasonably  have  been  expected.  This  is  what  she  did : 


First:  All  German  ships  in  Siamese  waters  (aggregat- 
ing about  18,000  tons)  were  seized  and  handed  over  to 


3 


her  Allies  at  the  nominal  rate  of  fifteen  shillings  per  ton 
per  month.  This,  in  view  of  the  then  prevailing  tonnage 
rates,  was  almost  like  making  a present  of  them. 

Second : All  enemy  subjects  were  immediately  arrested 
and  interned,  and  all  enemy  firms  wound  up,  thus  doing 
away  at  one  stroke  with  the  possibility  of  further  plotting 
or  intrigue  in  that  part  of  the  world  against  either  the 
British  Government  in  India  or  that  of  France  in  Indo- 
China.  This  helped  to  preserve  the  peace  and  made  it  safe 
to  release  from  police  duty  in  the  East  armed  forces  of 
Great  Britain  and  of  France  for  more  vital  service  on  the 
Western  front. 

Third : An  Expeditionary  Force,  consisting  of  an  Avia- 
tion Corps,  an  Automobile  Corps  n^id  a Sanitary  Corps, 
was  sent  to  France,  where  it  took  part  in  operations  side 
by  side  with  the  Allied  forces. 

Fourth : Siam’s  large  food  surplus  was  thenceforth 
unreservedly  at  the  disposal  of  her  Allies,  for  such  use  as 
they  might  think  wise  to  make  of  it. 

Fifth : Siam  held  and  still  holds  herself  at  all  times 
ready  to  render  such  other  assistance  within  her  power 
as  may  seem  necessary  if  called  upon  to  do  so  by  her 
Allies. 

Siam  did  all  she  could.  On  her  war  record,  she  is 
glad  and  proud  that  she  was  able  to  do  so  much. 

The  war  is  now  won — Siam’s  faith  is  justified.  And 
out  of  the  ruins  is  arising  what  had  long  been  fore- 
shadowed as  the  next  inevitable  step  of  progress — the 
League  of  Nations.  In  this  League  lies  implicit  the  great 
purposes  for  which  the  Allies  fought.  That  Siam  should 
approve  its  erection  is  inevitable.  She  has  for  many  years 


4 


identified  herself  with  and  shown  her  eagerness  to  coop- 
erate in  every  international  movement  of  a progressive 
character,  the  International  Hague  Conferences,  the  In- 
ternational Red  Cross,  the  Postal  Union,  the  Parcel-Post 
Convention,  the  International  Commission  for  the  Pro- 
tection of  Industrial  Property,  the  International  Maritime 
Conferences,  the  International  Prisons  Congress,  the  In- 
ternational Navigation  Conference,  the  Telegraphic  Con- 
ferences,' and  others.  As  Siam  cooperated  then,  she 
stands  ready  to  cooperate  now  in  their  ultimate  fruition. 

If  the  cooperation  aimed  at  by  the  League  is  to  be 
secured,  as  stated  in  the  preamble  of  the  Covenant  as 
proposed,  “by  the  maintenance  of  justice’’  and  “by  the 
prescription  of  open,  just  and  honorable  relations  be- 
tween nations”,  it  is  obligatory  upon  Siam  to  lay  be- 
fore her  Allies,  in  conference  assembled,  a problem  the 
equitable  solution  of  which  will  help  solidify  the  League 
and  crystallize  its  spirit.  There  is  at  present  in  existence 
a set  of  Treaties  entered  into  by  Siam  with  most  of  the 
leading  European  countries,  as  well  as  with  the  United 
States,  the  terms  of  which  have  become  admittedly  “in- 
applicable” (to  quote  the  language  of  the  Covenant)  to 
present  day  conditions.  These  Treaties  in  brief  provide, 
with  only  slight  modifications  (1)  for  the  substitution, 
for  foreigners,  of  the  law  and  courts  of  their  country  in 
place  of  Siamese  law,  to  wit,  exterritoriality,  and  (2)  for 
the  limitation  of  Siam’s  taxing  power  by  prohibitions 
upon  the  scope  of  such  power  in  reference  to  foreigners, 
and  more  specifically  in  reference  to  foreign  trade. 

These  treaties  have  caused  concern  for  many  years. 
They  have  frequently  come  up  for  discussion  between 
Siam  and  the  Powers  of  Europe,  and  progress  has  already 


5 


been  made  towards  restoration  of  that  fuller  sovereignty 
which  they  so  grievously  impair.  But  while  the  great 
Powers  have  been  quick  to  see  the  injustice  of  such  an 
invasion  of  Siam’s  rights  and  each  has  been  ready  to 
cooperate  if  the  others  would,  the  situation  has  bristled 
with  difficulties  which  until  now  it  has  not  been  possible 
to  overcome. 

Happily  this  is  now  changed.  A League  of  Nations 
is  at  its  birth,  a League  which  breathes  the  spirit  of 
justice  and  of  fair  dealing  among  the  nations  of  the  earth, 
a League  which  calls  for  “reconsideration  by  states,  mem- 
bers of  the  League,  of  Treaties  which  have  become  inap- 
plicable”. If  reconsideration  of  inapplicable  Treaty 
obligations  is  desirable  once  the  League  is  under  way,  is 
it  not  essential  upon  the  threshold  of  the  League’s 
existence  when  the  obligations  in  question  are  actually 
inequitable? 

If  the  League  expresses  the  spirit  in  which  Siam's 
problem  must  be  approached,  the  Paris  gathering  of  the 
nations  provides  the  occasion,  never  before  realized,  for 
harmonization  of  the  Treaties  with  the  purposes  for 
which  the  war  was  fought  and  with  the  spirit  of  the  cove- 
nant. First,  as  to  her  Treaties  with  her  enemies,  the 
war  has,  of  course,  destroyed  all  Siam's  onerous  obliga- 
tions to  the  enemy  powers.  It  is  inconceivable  that 
Germany  should  ever  hereafter  profit  at  Siam's  expense. 
Such  needless  generosity  to  the  vanquished  is  unthink- 
able. The  intolerable  injustice  to  Siam  need  not  be 
stressed. 

Putting  these  Treaties  in  the  scrap-heap  then,  as 
relics  of  an  obsolete  past,  of  Germany’s  dead  dream  of 
world  empire,  the  way  is  clear  for  joint  revision  of  her 


6 


other  Treaties  along  lines  which  the  great  Powers  have 
already  in  principle  accepted,  bnt  which  up  to  the  present 
have  been  impossible  of  any,  save  imperfect,  realization, 
because  of  the  difficulty  of  even  securing  that  prime 
requisite — joint  action  of  the  Powers.  In  cases  where 
Treaties  were  reconsidered  in  accordance  with  the  bind- 
ing clauses  providing  for  revision  which  many  of  them 
contained,  the  almost  universal  presence  of  a favored- 
nation  clause  made  largely  nugatory  any  such  separate 
attempt  at  revision.  The  action  of  one  power  depended 
upon  that  of  another  and  so  on  all  along  the  line.  But 
now  all  that  is  changed.  The  Powers  are  in  concert 
and  ripe  for  joint  co-operative  action. 

Convinced,  therefore,  of  the  justice  of  her  cause,  and 
of  the  propriety  and  expediency  of  utilizing  the  present 
moment  for  an  earnest  and  urgent  presentation  of  her 
needs,  with  confidence  in  the  result,  Siam  presents  her 
case  to  the  free  nations  of  the  earth. 


7 


II. 

These  Treaties  should  be  revised  on  grounds  of 

JUSTICE,  SINCE  THEY  CONSTITUTE  AN  UNNECESSARY  AND 
INTOLERABLE  IMPAIRMENT  OF  THE  SOVEREIGNTY  OF  A FREE 
AND  INDEPENDENT  NATION  WHICH  STAKED  ALL  IN  THE 
FIGHT  FOR  JUSTICE  AND  FOR  COMMON  HUMANITY.  UNJUST 
DISCRIMINATION  AGAINST  ITS  PEOPLE  HAS  BEEN  THE  RESULT. 

This  has  long  since  been  admitted  by  all  the  great 
Powers  now  in  Paris,  and  the  necessity  for  sweeping 

REVISION  EMPHATICALLY  RECOGNIZED. 

A.  The  Propriety  of  Treaty  Revision  Has  Been 
Admitted  by  the  Powers. 

For  evidence  of  this  we  need  only  turn  to  the  history 
of  Siam’s  relations  with  the  European  Powers. 

1.  First,  as  to  Exterritoriality. 

The  first  treaty  of  importance  between  Siam  and  any 
European  country  was  entered  into  with  Great  Britain  in 
1826.  From  this  time  may  be  said  to  date  the  entry  of 
Siam  into  modern  international  politics.  The  treaty  is  sig- 
nificant not  so  much  because  it  was  the  first  one  of  its  sort 
as  because  of  the  enlightened  provisions  which  it  con- 
tained. There  was  in  this  treaty  no  suggestion  of  invasion 
of  Siam’s  sovereignty,  rather  on  the  contrary  was  it  pro- 
vided that  “the  Siamese  shall  settle  every  matter  within 
the  Siamese  boundaries  according  to  their  own  will  and 
customs”,  and  that  “English  subjects  who  visit  a Siamese 
country  must  conduct  themselves  according  to  the  estab- 
lished Laws  of  the  Siamese  country,  in  every  particular”. 
Thus  her  earliest  relations  with  a foreign  power  were 


8 


happy  ones.  This  treaty  was  followed  (in  1833)  by  one 
with  the  United  States,  cementing  friendship  between  the 
two  nations  as  between  equals. 

Up  to  this  point  Siam’s  position  was  recognizedly 
what  it  should  be  to-day.  But  there  came  a change, 
ushered  in  by  another  treaty  with  Great  Britain  (dated 
1855-56)  curtailing  her  sovereignty  to  the  extent  that 
citizens  of  Great  Britain  were  for  the  most  part  taken 
from  under  her  jurisdiction  and  made  subject  to  the 
laws  of  their  native  land  as  administered  by  the  consul 
and  his  aides.  Cases  where  both  parties,  or  the  defend- 
ant, were  Siamese  remained  as  formerly  under  Siamese 
jurisdiction.  But  cases  where  both  parties  or  the  defend- 
ant were  British  were  put  under  British  Consular  juris- 
diction. And  even  in  the  Siamese  Courts,  where  a British 
citizen  was  plaintiff  the  consul  might  attend  or  receive 
copies  of  the  proceedings.  Subsequent  treaties  providing 
for  a similar  system  or  for  a scheme  of  joint  Siamese  and 
foreign  consular  jurisdiction  were  entered  into  with  all 
the  great  Powers, — with  France  (incorporating  harsher 
terms),  with  Italy,  Japan,  the  United  States,  Portugal, 
Belgium,  Russia,  The  Netherlands,  Spain,  Sweden,  Nor- 
way, Denmark,  Germany  and  Austria-Hungary.  Thus 
Siam  was  definitely  deprived  of  one  of  the  most  precious 
attributes  of  sovereign  power,  the  right  to  administer 
even-handed  justice  to  all  throughout  her  domains. 

In  these  early  days  Siam’s  commercial  relations  with 
the  western  world  were  in  their  infancy.  It  is  not  hard 
to  understand  that  nations  of  a civilization  springing 
from  roots  so  remote  from  hers  guarded  themselves 
and  their  peoples  in  the  way  they  did  from  the  possible 
risks  of  laws  and  customs  which  they  were  then  unable 


9 


to  understand.  Geographically,  too,  Siam  lay  in  the  same 
continent  with  China  and  with  most  of  Turkey  with 
which  the  occidental  world  had  been  longer  in  contact 
and  where  many  of  the  customs  were  then  barbarous  in 
the  extreme.  But  with  Siam’s  rapid  advance  on  the  road 
of  progress,  these  provisions  originally  intended  per- 
haps to  simplify  her  relations  with  other  countries  became 
vexatious  obstacles  to  progress. 

Her  later  history  has  been  one  continual  struggle  to 
recover  what  was  thus  taken  from  her.  It  was  Great 
Britain  again  who  took  the  lead  in  restoring  what  she 
had  been  the  first  to  destroy.  In  1883  another  treaty 
provided  for  the  restoration  of  Siamese  sovereignty  over 
British  subjects  in  the  three  northern  provinces  of  Lakon, 
Lampoonchi  and  Chiengmai  (and  various  minor  prov- 
inces subsequently  annexed  thereto)  through  the  agency 
of  so-called  International  Courts.  But  even  here,  in 
these  courts,  which  in  spite  of  their  title  were  strictly 
Siamese,  the  British  Consul  had  the  right  to  be  present 
at  the  trial,  to  receive  copies  of  the  proceedings,  to 
make  suggestions  to  the  judges,  and  at  any  time  before 
judgment,  in  a case  where  both  parties  or  the  defendant 
were  British  citizens,  to  evoke  the  case,  that  is  to  say,  to 
order  its  transference  to  the  regular  British  Consular 
Court  (the  so-called  right  of  evocation).  This  partial 
restoration  of  Siam’s  sovereignty  in  the  northern  prov- 
inces was  extended  by  subsequent  treaties  to  include  the 
citizens  of  Italy,  France  and  Denmark.  And  by  later 
treaties  with  all  the  great  European  powers,  the  early 
system  of  joint  jurisdiction  was  done  away  with. 

Another  advance  along  these  lines  was  made  in  1907 
when  France  by  treaty  agreed  to  restore  to  the  sov- 


10 


ereignty  of  these  so-called  International  Courts  all 
French  Asiatic  subjects  throughout  Siam  registered  as 
such  at  the  French  Consulate  previous  to  March  23rd, 
1907  (or  resident  in  the  Provinces  of  Udorn  and  Isarn, 
regardless  of  their  date  of  registry).  This  extended  the 
International  Court  system  throughout  Siam,  including 
the  special  consular  privileges  described  above.  But 
France  was  willing  to  do  more  than  this.  It  was  agreed 
that  upon  the  promulgation  of  the  Siamese  Codes  the 
jurisdiction  of  these  international  courts  should  be  trans- 
ferred to  the  ordinary  Siamese  Courts,  and  that  the  Con- 
sul’s right  of  evocation  should  cease  in  each  case  upon 
the  promulgation  of  the  Code  applicable  thereto.  More- 
over, full  sovereignty  was  restored  to  Siam  over  all  other 
French  Asiatic  subjects,  i.  e.  those  (not  resident  in  the 
Provinces  of  Udorn  and  Isarn)  registered  subsequent  to 
March  23rd,  1907.  As  to  this  class  of  foreigners  therefore 
Siam  is  back  where  she  was  in  1826. 

In  1909  came  another  long  step  forward  when  Great 
Britain  agreed  (by  Treaty  of  that  date)  to  submit  all 
her  citizens  throughout  Siam  who  had  been  registered 
at  the  British  Consulate  before  March  10th,  1909,  to  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  International  Courts,  and  all  those 
registered  subsequent  to  that  date  to  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  ordinary  Siamese  Courts.  While  the  Consul  still 
preserved  his  right  of  evocation  from  the  International 
Courts,  it  was  provided  as  in  the  French  Treaty  that 
such  right  should  cease  upon  the  promulgation  of  the 
appropriate  Siamese  Code.  And  upon  completion  of  the 
set  of  Codes,  the  jurisdiction  of  the  International  Courts 
should  be  taken  over  by  the  ordinary  Siamese  Courts. 
These  important  conditions  were  also  imposed : 


11 


“In  all  cases  whether  in  the  International 
Courts  or  in  the  ordinary  Siamese  Courts,  in 
which  a British  subject  is  defendant,  or  accused,  a 
European  legal  adviser  shall  sit  as  a judge  in  the 
Court  of  First  Instance. 

“In  cases  in  which  a British  born  or  natural- 
ized subject,  not  of  Asiatic  descent  may  be  a party, 
a European  adviser  shall  sit  as  judge  in  the  Court 
of  First  Instance,  and  where  such  British  subject 
is  defendant  or  accused,  the  opinion  of  the  adviser 
shall  prevail. 

****** 

“The  judgment  on  appeal  from  either  the  Inter- 
national Courts  or  the  ordinary  Siamese  Courts 
[in  each  case  the  Siamese  Court  of  Appeals  at 
Bangkok]  shall  bear  the  signature  of  two  Euro- 
pean judges.’’ 

A Treaty  making  similar  provisions  was  entered  into 
in  1913  between  Denmark  and  Siam. 

In  1916  the  Russian  Government,  upon  its  own  initia- 
tive, entered  into  negotiations  for  the  same  sort  of  treaty, 
but  the  Revolution  in  that  country  cut  the  matter  short. 

The  situation  stands  at  present  thus:  Throughout 
Siam,  [with  the  exception  of  Italian  citizens  and  non- 
Asiatic  citizens  of  France,  in  the  provinces  of  Lam- 
poonchi,  Lakon,  and  Chiengmai,  enlarged],  in  cases  be- 
tween citizens  of  the  same  foreign  country  or  in  which  the 
following  citizens  are  defendants, — i.  e.,  the  non-Asiatic 
citizens  of  France,  the  citizens  of  the  United  States,  of 
Italy,  Japan,  Portugal,  Belgium,  Russia,  The  Netherlands, 
Spain,  Sweden  and  Norway, — justice  is  administered  in 
each  case  in  their  own  courts,  by  their  own  Consuls,  and 
according  to  their  own  laws,  nor  is  any  Treaty  provision 


12 


made  by  any  of  these  countries  (save  France  and  Japan) 
for  any  change  in  the  present  status  or  method  of  adminis- 
tration of  justice.  Citizens  of  Italy  and  of  France  (non- 
Asiatic)  who  reside  in  the  Provinces  of  Lakon,  Lampoon- 
chi  and  Chiengmai  (enlarged)  as  well  as  Asiatic  French 
citizens  throughout  Siam  registered  at  the  French  Con- 
sulate previous  to  March  23rd,  1907  (and  those  resident  in 
the  Provinces  of  Udorn  and  Isarn  regardless  of  their  date 
of  registry)  and  British  and  Danish  citizens  throughout 
Siam,  registered  at  their  respective  Consulates  before 
March  10,  1909,  and  July  12,  1913,  respectively,  come 
under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  International  Courts,  to 
which  are  attached  the  regular  Consular  privileges,  in- 
cluding right  of  evocation.  Japan,  France,  Great  Britain 
and  Denmark  have  each  explicitly  promised  to  modify  this 
method  of  administration  upon  promulgation  of  the  Siam- 
ese Codes,  the  right  of  evocation  to  cease  upon  promul- 
gation of  the  appropriate  Code,  jurisdiction  to  be 
transferred  bodily  to  the  Siamese  Courts  upon  pro- 
mulgation of  the  Codes  in  their  entirety.  The  British 
and  the  Danish  treaties  further  provide  that  in  all 
cases  to  which  their  non-Asiatic  citizens  are  parties, 
or  where  their  Asiatic  citizens  are  defendants,  whether 
in  the  International  or  the  Siamese  Courts,  a European 
legal  adviser  shall  sit  as  judge;  that  where  their  non- 
Asiatic  citizens  are  defendants  the  opinion  of  the  adviser 
shall  prevail ; and,  by  French  treaty  as  well,  that  all  judg- 
ments on  appeal  shall  bear  the  signature  of  two  European 
judges.  Of  the  remaining  classes  of  foreigners,  French 
Asiatic  citizens  (not  residents  of  Udorn  or  Isarn)  regis- 
tered at  their  Consulate  subsequent  to  March  23rd,  1907, 
come  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  ordinary  Siamese 


13 


Courts,  as  do  British  and  Danish  citizens  registered  sub- 
sequent to  March  10th,  1909,  and  July  12,  1913,  respect- 
ively, subject  to  the  above  limitations. 

We  will  not  now  discuss  the  injustice  of  imposing 
upon  Siam  this  complicated  piece  of  judicial  machinery. 
Our  interest  at  this  point  is  in  seeing  that  modifications 
have  already  actually  been  introduced,  that  every  great 
power  has  acquiesced  therein,  and  that  the  patchwork 
result  is  due  to  the  necessarily  piecemeal  character  of  the 
changes  introduced.  By  this  method  it  might  w6ll  be 
years  before  all  the  Powers  could  take  effective  action. 

2.  As  to  Fiscal  Limitations. 

Much  the  same  situation  confronts  us  when  we  study 
the  history  of  Siam’s  taxing  power.  The  early  treaties, 
as  in  the  case  of  her  jurisdictional  sovereignty,  in  no  way 
infringed  upon  her  fiscal  sovereignty,  (Treaty  with 
Great  Britain — 1826,  with  United  States — 1833).  It  is 
stated  in  the  Treaty  of  1826 : 

“Merchants  * * * must  pay  the  duty  upon 
commerce  according  to  the  customs  of  the  place  or 
country  on  either  side,” 

“Merchants  are  forbidden  to  bring  Opium 
which  is  positively  a contraband  article  in  the  Ter- 
ritories of  Siam ; and  should  a merchant  intro- 
duce any,  the  Governor  shall  seize,  burn,  and 
destroy  the  whole  of  it.” 

But  in  1855-56  the  situation  changed.  By  the  terms 
of  her  Treaty  with  Great  Britain  of  that  date  not  only 
was  opium,  the  former  positive  contraband,  put  on  the 
free  list,  together  with  bullion  and  personal  effects,  but  a 
limitation  of  three  per  cent,  ad  valorem  was  imposed 


14 


upon  the  duties  chargeable  upon  all  other  importations, 
and  even  in  cases  of  dispute  as  to  the  value  of  these  goods, 
Siamese  customs  officials  were  deprived  of  the  final  voice, 
and  required  to  call  in  the  British  Consul  to  aid  them 
in  reaching  a decision.  All  exports  were  to  be  subject  to 
but  one  duty,  whether  excise,  inland  transit,  or  export 
duty,  and  the  rate  for  each  article  was  definitely  fixed 
(according  to  the  then  prevailing  rates  between  Siam  and 
China)  by  schedule  attached  to  the  treaty.  Nor  was  this 
all.  The  tax  upon  land  held  by  British  citizens  was 
limited  to  a certain  schedule  rate,  and  it  was  specifically 
stated  that  “no  additional  charge  or  tax  of  any  kind*  may 
be  imposed  upon  a British  subject,  unless  it  obtain  the 
sanction  both  of  the  supreme  Siamese  authorities  and  the 
British  Consul.”  In  line  with  this  provision,  Siam  was 
forbidden  to  impose  charges  for  passports  or  even  to  col- 
lect any  of  the  fines,  penalties,  etc.,  levied  upon  British 
subjects  for  infractions  of  the  laws,  with  the  sole  excep- 
tion of  those  levied  for  infringement  of  the  liquor  and 
opium  regulations. 

Similar  treaties  with  only  slight  modification  were 
entered  into  with  France,  the  United  States,  Italy,  Japan, 
Belgium,  Portugal,  Russia,  The  Netherlands,  Spain, 
Sweden,  Norway,  Denmark,  Germany,  and  Austria-Hun- 
gary. 

But,  as  in  the  case  of  the  invasion  of  her  jurisdictional 
sovereignty,  the  Powers  gradually  saw  fit  to  modify  in 
certain  respects  the  harsher  features  of  these  fiscal  limi- 
tations. The  first  change  came  in  respect  to  spirituous 
liquors,  beer  and  wine  (Treaty  with  Great  Britain  in 


^Italics  ours. 


15 


1883)  and  this  was  followed  np  by  similar  treaties  with 
France,  the  United  States,  Italy,  Japan,  Belgium,  Por- 
tugal, Russia,  The  Netherlands,  Spain,  Sweden,  Norway, 
Denmark,  Germany,  and  Austria-Hungary.  Briefly  these 
modifications  of  the  original  treaties  provided  that  impor- 
tations of  spirituous  liquors,  beer  and  wine,  should  be 
subject  to  the  same  tax  (in  the  case  of  beer  or  wine  not  to 
exceed  ten  per  cent,  ad  valorem,  or  eight  per  cent,  accord- 
ing to  the  French  Treaty)  as  alcoholic  beverages  of  sim- 
ilar strength  manufactured  in  Siam.  Where  such  impor- 
tations were  of  greater  alcoholic  strength  the  tax  should 
be  proportionately  higher,  but  never  to  exceed  ten  per 
cent,  or  in  one  case  eight  per  cent.  And  it  was  specifically 
provided  that  these  taxes  were  in  substitution  for  and  not 
in  addition  to  the  three  per  cent,  import  duty ; and  that  no 
other  tax  of  any  sort  be  laid  on  liquors,  wines  or  beer. 

In  1887  Great  Britain  by  Regulation  placed  her  cit- 
izens under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Siamese  laws  regulat- 
ing the  manufacture,  sale  and  use  of  opium.  By  these 
laws  Siam  had  been  long  endeavoring  to  curb  and  con- 
trol the  opium  traffic,  and  the  penalties  which  she  imposed 
for  infraction  of  the  rules  were  harsh. 

There  have  been  minor  fiscal  modifications  since.  In 
1900  (by  Treaty  with  Great  Britain)  the  earlier  British 
schedule  of  land  tax  rates  was  done  away  with,  an$  in 
substitution  it  was  provided  that  the  tax  upon  land  held 
by  British  citizens  should  never  exceed  the  rate  payable 
in  Lower  Burma. 

The  1909  Treaty  with  Great  Britain  registered  a great 
advance  upon  the  earlier  ones  by  wiping  out  completely 
this  restriction  upon  land  tax  rates  and  providing  for 
general  taxation  of  British  persons  and  property  at  th& 


16 


same  rates  as  those  to  which  Siamese  citizens  might  at 
any  time  be  subject. 

The  situation  stands  at  present  thus:  As  to  Siam’s 
foreign  trade  with  the  following  countries, — i.  e.,  Great 
Britain,  France,  the  United  States,  Italy,  Japan,  Bel- 
gium, Portugal,  Russia,  The  Netherlands,  Spain,  Sweden, 
Norway,  and  Denmark — (1)  there  is  a free  list  compris- 
ing opium,  bullion,  personal  effects  (and  food  stuffs,  in 
the  case  of  France)  ; (2)  the  duty  on  imports  is  limited 
to  three  per  cent,  ad  valorem  except  in  the  case  of  spirit- 
uous liquors,  beer  and  wine  (limit  ten,  or  eight  per  cent, 
in  the  case  of  France)  ; (3)  the  tax  on  exports  is  limited 
to  a single  tax,  whether  it  be  excise,  inland  transit  or 
duty,  the  amount  of  which  was  fixed  in  1855  for  each  spe- 
cific article,  and  which  has  never  since  been  changed. 
The  citizens  of  Great  Britain  and  their  property  are  sub- 
ject to  whatever  taxes  may  at  any  time  be  levied  upon 
Siamese  citizens  and  property,  but  such  taxation  shall 
never  be  other  or  higher  than  the  current  Siamese  tax- 
ation. 

3.  Summary. 

The  great  powers  have  thus  by  their  acts  admitted 
the  propriety  of  revision  of  these  treaties.  Ever  since  the- 
promulgation  of  the  original  treaties  invading  Siam’s 
sovereignty,  there  has  been  a continuous  effort  made  to 
help  restore  her  to  her  old  position.  In  this  effort  every 
country  has  taken  part.  Not  only  is  Siam's  jurisdictional 
sovereignty  in  process  of  restoration,  but  even  in  regard 
to  her  fiscal  sovereignty,  where  less  progress  has  been 
made,  the  Powers  have  admitted  the  harshness  of  their 


17 


terms  and  have  to  some  extent  improved  the  situation  in 
its  more  dangerous  aspects. 

Why  is  it  then  that  they  have  admitted  the  propriety 
of  revision?  Because  the  above  described  system  is 
inequitable  as  well  as  “inapplicable”  to  present-day  condi- 
tions and  because  its  further  continuance  constitutes  such 
a grave  injustice  as  Siam  cannot  believe  the  great  Powers 
will  for  a moment  tolerate  once  the  matter  is  properly 
called  to  their  attention. 

B.  The  Above-Described  System  is  Inapplicable  to 
Present-Day  Conditions. 

1.  First,  as  to  Exterritoriality. 

(1)  It  invades  the  sovereignty  of  Siam,  a free  nation. 

All  free  nations  are  supreme  within  their  own  ter- 
ritories and  govern  all  who  come  therein  according  to 
the  law  of  the  land.  Is  Siam,  late  partner  in  the  war  for 
freedom,  less  than  a free  nation?  Her  capacity  for  self- 
government  needs  no  demonstration.  It  is  a mockery  of 
freedom  that  this  obsolete  system  should  be  fastened  still 
upon  her  country. 

(2)  It  makes  the  administration  of  impartial  justice 


No  country  can  administer  justice  with  impartial  |iand 
which  has  within  its  borders  some  fifteen  different  sets  of 
laws  and  as  many  bodies  of  citizens  each  one  responsible 
to  only  one  of  these  tribunals.  No  uniformity  of  law 
or  justice  can  ever  be  assured  by  such  a system.  No 
self-respecting  country  would  for  a moment  tolerate  such 
a state  of  affairs  within  its  borders  if  it  could  help  itself. 
Why  then  must  Siam? 


18 


(3)  It  puts  obstacles  in  the  way  of  the  maintenance 
of  order , beiny  a continual  affront  to  Siam’s  dignity  and 
a fruitful  source  of  irritation. 

The  multiplicity  of  foreign  officials  over  whom  Siam 
can  have  no  control  introduces  a disturbing  and  an  un- 
stabilizing element  in  the  community.  Misunderstand- 
ings are  inevitable  between  Siamese  officials  and  these 
foreigners  of  an  alien  civilization  no  matter  how  well 
disposed  to  one  another  they  may  be.  And  in  the  execu- 
tion of  their  duty  Siamese  officials  must  often  be 
thwarted  by  those  of  dubious  citizenship.  These  possi- 
bilities arise  from  the  basic  fact  that  Siam  is  not  master 
in  her  house. 


(4)  It  is  expensive — involving  as  it  does  the  mainte- 
nance of  European  judges  and  advisers. 

The  salaries  of  European  officials  are  always  higher 
than  those  of  the  corresponding  Siamese  officials.  The 
presence  of  this  system  therefore  in  the  International 
Courts,  as  called  for  by  the  British  and  the  Danish 
Treaties,  necessitates  heavier  expenditures  than  would 
otherwise  be  the  case  were  the  Courts  administered  solely 
by  the  Siamese.  • ' , . ^ 

(5)  It  furnishes  no^g//} i & 

^Q^complction  of  the  Siamese  Codes  of  Laws — now  in 

process — since  there  is  nowhere  even  in  the  British  or  the 
Danish  Treaties  any  assurance  that  once  these  Codes  have 
been  completed  and  promulgated  the  requirement  that 
European  judges  and  advisers  assist  in  the  Siamese 
Courts  ivill  be  yielded  and  these  Courts  restored  to  their 
f ull  measure  of  authority  (as  recognized  by  treaties  previ- 
ous to  1855). 


19 


A transfer  of  jurisdiction  from  the  International  to 
the  ordinary  Siamese  Courts  can  only  be  of  value  to  Siam 
if  with  it  goes  the  assurance  that  the  administration  of 
justice  will  then  be  wholly  Siamese.  But  such  is  not  the 
case.  Apparently,  save  for  the  final  wiping  out  of  the 
privilege  of  evocation  (which  privilege  is  rarely  exer- 
cised), the  transfer  of  jurisdiction  called  for  upon  promul- 
gation of  her  Codes  is  a transfer  in  name  and  nothing 
more.  As  long  as  European  judges  and  advisers  are  to  be 
attached  to  the  Siamese,  as  they  are  at  present  attached  to 
the  International  Courts,  with  all  their  present  powers 
and  privileges,  Siam  stands  to  gain  nothing  by  codification 
of  her  laws.  In  this  view  of  the  case,  it  is  surprising  that 
the  codification  has  progressed  so  far.  The  work  consists 
of  a restatement  in  the  shape  of  codes  of  the  original  Siam- 
ese laws  as  they  have  been  evolved  through  the  experience 
of  centuries,  a system  native  to  herself  and  breathing  the 
spirit  of  justice,  moderation,  and  fair-play,  which  is  the 
heritage  of  her  race.  The  work  is  subdivided  into  five 
heads — the  Codes  on  Criminal  and  on  Civil  Procedure,  on 
Criminal  and  on  Civil  Substantive  Law,  and  on  the 
Organization  of  the  Courts.  This  work  will,  of  course, 
proceed,  but  it  would  naturally  go  much  faster  were 
there  present  in  the  Siamese  mind  the  thought  that  com- 
pletion of  the  work  would  spell  freedom  from  her  bondage 
to  these  judges  and  advisers  of  an  alien  race,  however 
worthy.  Siam  wants  to  go  back  to  the  status  of  the  early 
Treaties,  but  for  this  the  present  treaty  schemes  do  not 
provide. 

It  is  clear  then  that  this  oppressive  scheme  of  exter- 
ritoriality must  be  removed  in  its  entirety,  both  because 


20 


it  works  practical  and  unnecessary  hardship  to  Siam  and 
because  it  is  unjust. 

2.  Second,  as  to  Fiscal  Limitations. 

There  remain  to  be  considered  the  limitations  upon 
Siam’s  fiscal  sovereignty,  an  instance  of  injustice  perhaps 
more  glaring  even  than  that  of  exterritoriality  because  of 
its  immediate  and  disastrous  practical  consequences. 

(1)  It  invades  the  sovereignty  of  Siam. 

This  argument  needs  no  elaboration. 

(2)  Far  worse  than  this  it  has  placed  Siam  in  the 
unenviable  position  of  being  forced  to  rely  for  a large 
proportion  of  her  revenues  upon  the  objectionable  opium 
and  gambling  monopolies,  with  all  the  evil  consequences 
to  the  people  which  this  involves. 

Siam's  customs  revenues  have  been  sharply  curtailed 
by  virtue  of  the  three  per  cent,  limitation  on  imports  and 
the  fixed  schedules  of  antiquated  export  duties,  schedules 
which  have  never  been  changed  since  1855,  notwithstand- 
ing the  changes  in  the  values  of  those  articles  since  that 
time.  This  arbitrary  curtailment  of  her  revenue  deriv- 
able from  customs  forced  her,  therefore,  in  order  to  keep 
pace  with  the  growing  needs  of  her  progressive  and  for- 
ward-looking people,  and  with  the  development  of  the 
national  administration,  to  depend  upon  supplying  such 
needs  from  other  sources.  Her  expenditures  although 
prudently  and  wisely  made  for  improvements  which  have 
greatly  benefited  the  population,  have  been  steadily 
increasing  and  her  revenue,  if  she  is  to  maintain  her  pres- 
ent sound  financial  condition,  must  perforce  keep  pace. 


21 


In  finance,  Siam  has  been  prudent.  In  the  face  of 
difficulty  and  the  necessities  of  growth  from  a cloistered 
Oriental  state  to  a modern  country  she  has  been  no  spend- 
thrift. Unlike.countiifc*  like  Turkey  4V  she  has 

A A 

kept  free  from  the  stultifying  grip  of  foreign  money  lend- 
ers. On  March  31st,  1919,  her  national  debt  stood  at 
£6,702,220  (pounds  sterling)  or  87,128,860  ticals  (at  the 
present  rate  of  thirteen  ticals  to  the  pound),  as  compared 
with  an  estimated  revenue  for  1918-19  of  69,500,000  ticals 
and  an  actual  revenue  in  1910-17  (the  latest  year  for 
actuals)  of  82,911,119  ticals.  Her  revenues  have  in- 
creased from  fifteen  odd  million  ticals  in  1892-93  (the  first 
year  for  which  the  figures  have  been  recorded  with  any 
great  degree  of  accuracy)  to  the  present  figures  recorded 
above  of  82  odd  millions.  Her  national  debt  dates  only 
from  1905,  when  the  first  loan  was  negotiated.  Her  cur- 
rency has  recently  been  put  on  a gold  basis  (1908)  and  the 
exchange  value  of  the  tical  standardized.  It  will  thus  be 
seen  that  Siam’s  growth  is  rooted  on  a sound  financial 
basis. 

Within  the  limits  of  prudence  and  with  an  eye  to  the 
preservation  and  strengthening  of  her  financial  integrity, 
Siam  has  invested  even  a large  part  of  her  income  in  im- 
provements of  a forward-looking  character.  The  sub- 
stance of  her  loans  (£6  million  odd  or  87  million  ticals) 
went  into  railroad  building,  while  out  of  such  annual  sur- 
pluses as  she  has  had  have  been  defrayed  the  costs  of  fur- 
ther railroad  building  (2  million  odd  ticals  in  1916-17),  of 
irrigation  projects  ( 1 million  odd  ticals  in  the  same  year) , 
and  of  the  splendid  Bangkok  water-works  (which  have 
cost  perhaps  1 V2  million  ticals  to  date),  a plant  which  has 
completely  wiped  out  cholera  in  that  city.  These  things 


22 


are  a part  of  progress  and  a wise  tax  upon  the  people  bene- 
fited. Siam  has,  if  anything,  erred  on  the  side  of  caution. 
But  even  so  her  expenditures  have  inevitably  grown  and 
further  e sWti u s t,  entail  fuffher  growth  in  revenue. 

A deficit  in  the  revenue  is  anticipated  for  the  current  year. 

While  her  present  position  is  sound  and  her  record 
free  from  taint  of  extravagance,  Siam  has  had  to  pay  a 
hitter  price  for  this  stability  of  her  exchequer.  For  with- 
out the  opium  and  gambling  revenues  to  pay  her  bills,  she 
would  not  now  be  financially  secure. 

All  along  Siam  has  been  faced,  as  she  is  still,  with  the 
problem  of  how  best  to  increase  her  revenues  in  order  to 
satisfy  the  growing  demands  upon  her  purse.  As  far  as 
customs  duties  are  concerned  she  was  and  is,  as  we  know, 
helpless.  While  her  foreign  trade  has  been  growing 
steadily  (a  growth  of  13  per  cent,  in  the  last  ten  years, 
1906-7  to  1916-17)  and  the  receipts  from  customs  duties 
have,  in  the  same  period,  increased  39  per  cent.,  this  dif- 
ference in  percentages  can  of  course  be  explained  only 
on  the  ground  of  increased  efficiency  in  administration 
of  customs  (since  otherwise  the  figures  would  be  the 
same).  This  has  probably  by  now  reached  top-notch. 
Nothing  more  can  reasonably  be  looked  for  in  this  direc- 
tion. And  while  customs  duties  have  increased  39  per 
cent.,  the  total  revenue  has  in  the  same  period  grown  by 
45  per  cent.  Customs  have  therefore  always  lagged  be- 
hind and  as  has  just  been  pointed  out,  will  probably  from 
now  on  lag  much  more  markedly  than  before. 

Her  customs  being  fixed  by  the  three  per  cent,  and  the 
1855  schedule  limits,  she  has  been  forced  to  look  elsewhere 
for  the  sorely  needed  revenue.  Of  the  other  sources  open 
to  her,  the  income  derivable  from  opium  and  gambling 


23 


monopolies  were  alone  capable  of  the  necessary  expansion. 
This  is  because  an  agricultural  country  of  this  sort  has  no 
great  resources  beyond  those  derivable  from  indirect  taxa- 
tion,— customs,  excise,  license-fees  and  the  like.  Direct 
taxation  is  a resource  of  only  limited  availability. 

Direct  taxation  in  Siam  has,  for  a time,  reached  the 
limit  of  its  possible  expansion.  The  simplest  form — the 
capitation  tax — yields  approximately  8 million  ticals  an- 
nually, which  cannot  be  increased.  Income  taxation  is 
at  present  and  will  be  for  many  years  an  impossibility. 
There  are  in  Siam  about  nine  million  people.  Of  these 
a handful  only  have  incomes,  from  which  any  practical 
rate  of  taxation  would  return  more  than  the  cost  of  the 
levy.  The  remainder  are  small  farmers,  peasantry,  la- 
borers and  priests.  There  are  no  substantial  industries, 
except  those  established  by  foreign  capital.  Even  were 
the  treaties  so  revised  that  the  income  of  these  might  be 
taxed,  it  would  be  the  worst  possible  financial  expedient 
for  Siam,  which  needs  the  investment  of  foreign  capital, 
to  begin  by  thus  discouraging  it. 

Taxation  of  land  values  is  hopelessly  out  of  harmony 
with  all  the  traditions  of  the  East.  In  all  Eastern  Coun- 
tries title  to  the  land  vests  in  theory  in  the  government, 
which  leases  it  to  the  occupant.  The  only  form  of  land 
taxation  which  does  not  conflict  with  this  tradition  is 
therefore  a tax  upon  the  use  of  land — and  such  taxes  have 
already  been  developed  to  the  limit  of  their  productivity. 

Siam  had  therefore  to  fall  back  upon  indirect  taxation. 
Customs  and  excise  being  by  treaty  non-expandable,  she 
had  to  look  to  licenses,  and  the  only  ones  of  any  produc- 
tivity were  the  licenses  to  gamble  and  to  carry  on  the 
opium  traffic.  These  she  was  forced  to  rely  upon  in  order 


24 


to  turn  her  threatened  deficits  into  surpluses.  Her  posi- 
tion is  unenviable  indeed. 

(3)  This  perpetuation  of  the  opium  and  gambling 
traffic  has  been  maintained  by  the  Government  against  its 
will  and  in  the  face  of  a powerful  body  of  hostile  public 
sentiment. 

All  this  has  been  done  because  perforce,  it  had  to  be 
and  there  was  no  way  out  of  a bad  bargain.  This  is  clear 
from  statements  emanating  from  official  sources.  The 
Minister  of  Finance  (in  his  annual  report  of  1904-5) 
said  “State  regulated  gambling  is,  doubtless,  indefensible 
on  moral  and  other  grounds,  but  the  practical  ad- 
ministrator has  to  take  facts  as  he  finds  them  . . . 

The  question  in  Siam  is  entirely  one  of  ways  and  means 
. . . . His  Majesty’s  Ministers  are  fully  alive  to  the 

evils  inherent  in  this  method  of  raising  revenue.”  In  his 
annual  report  of  1905-6,  referring  to  the  possibility  of 
increasing  the  3 % import  duty  rate  he  said  “By  decreeing 
the  abolition  of  all  public  gambling  in  the  provinces 
[which  had  just  been  carried  out],  the  Government  has 
given  an  earnest  of  its  desire  to  purge  the  administra- 
tion of  any  connection  with  a questionable  form  of  rev- 
enue and  it  now  confidently  looks  to  the  Powers  with 
whom  Siam  is  in  treaty  relations  to  assist  it  to  complete 
this  great  reform  by  making  it  possible  to  meet  the  heavy 
loss  which  the  suppression  of  the  gambling  houses  in 
Bangkok  will  entail.  I trust  to  be  able  to  report  next 
year  what  progress  has  been  made  in  this  matter”.  Two 
years  later  he  reported  (report  of  1907-8),  “For  the  final 
accomplishment  of  its  purpose,  viz.,  the  abolition  of  the 
remaining  gambling  houses  (now  confined  to  the  capital) 
the  Government  must  await  the  result  of  the  negotiations 


25 


with  the  Treaty  Powers  for  an  enhancement  of  the  general 
import  duty,  at  present  fixed  at  3 per  cent.  It  is  impos- 
sible to  face  any  further  loss  of  revenue  without  some 
quid  pro  quo.”  In  1916-17  he  states  that : “For  various 
reasons,  no  progress  has  been  made  in  the  negotiations 
for  the  revision  of  the  Customs  Tariff’,  and  further  on 
“The  Government  felt  that  a further  decided  step  for- 
ward must  be  taken  if  the  country  was  to  be  entirely 
freed,  within  a reasonable  period  of  time,  of  the  evils 
incidental  to  the  retention  of  large  gambling  and  lottery 
establishments  in  the  Capital  of  the  Kingdom ; and  much 
consideration  has  been  given  by  His  Majesty  and  his 
Ministers  to  the  best  means  of  attaining  the  desired 
object”. 

At  a conference  of  the  International  Opium  Commis- 
sion held  at  Shanghai  (1909),  the  Chief  Commissioner 
of  the  Siamese  delegation  told  the  Conference  (as  quoted 
in  the  Report  of  the  Proceedings)  that,  “The  aim  of  his 
Government  was  to  ultimately  suppress  the  use  of  opium 
altogether,  but  they  intended  to  follow  a conservative 
policy,  and  not  to  venture  on  experiments  that  might  prove 
disastrous  to  the  revenue  of  the  State  without  helping 
towards  the  desired  end”. 

In  his  report  of  1918-19  the  Finance  Minister  has  this 
to  say  of  opium : “The  Government,  in  pursuance  of  its 
declared  policy  of  gradual  suppression,  has  decided  to 
effect  a further  change  in  the  method  of  sale,  by  elim- 
inating the  middlemen  * * *.  In  Bangkok  the  den- 

keepers  have  always  received  their  supplies  direct  from 
the  Government.  * * * Sales  for  home  consumption 

will  also  be  made  by  Government  officials — thus  entirely 
doing  away  with  the  middlemen”. 


26 


The  Government  realizes  then  that  the  opium  traffic 
must  be  done  away  with.  And  it  intends  to  do  away  with 
it  at  the  earliest  moment  compatible  with  Siam’s  financial 
safety.  But  it  realizes  too  that  that  moment  has  not 
come  and  that,  until  the  Powers  grasp  the  situation 
and  undo  the  evil  which  they  have  unwittingly  done  to 
her,  Siam  is  helpless. 

(4)  Siam  is  trying  her  best  to  do  aicay  with  this 
moral  stigma. 

As  the  above  quotations  show,  Siam  has  already  done 
away  with  the  gambling  monopoly.  Notwithstanding  the 
importance  of  this  source  of  revenue  to  the  Government 
(which  in  1904-5  amounted  to  over  seven  million  ticals, 
the  largest  single  item  of  revenue  for  that  year  and  one- 
fifth  of  the  total  revenue)  the  Government  the  following 
year  decreed  the  closing  within  two  years’  time  of  all 
gambling  farms  and  lotteries  outside  the  capital,  and 
provided  for  the  final  eradication  (in  1907)  of  those 
within  the  city  limits  if  the  state  of  the  finances  should 
then  permit  such  drastic  curtailment.  Had  it  not  been 
for  the  healthy  condition  of  the  finances  of  the  country, 
due  to  the  prudent  management  of  many  years,  a step 
such  as  this  could  never  have  been  taken.  But  the  pro- 
gram as  planned  could  not  then  be  fully  carried  out.  The 
Powers  not  having  seen  fit  to  revise  the  customs  rates, 
the  final  step  in  the  eradication  of  this  evil  from  the 
country,  the  closing  of  the  gambling  houses  in  Bangkok, 
had  to  be  postponed  and  was  not  actually  effected  until 
ten  years  later.  In  1916  the  last  of  the  lotteries  was  abol- 
ished, and  this  was  followed  the  next  year  by  the  closing 
of  the  gambling  houses  in  Bangkok.  Next  to  opium  and 


27 


the  land  tax,  these  monopolies,  just  before  their  abolition, 
were  the  most  productive  of  Siam’s  revenue  sources. 

Siam  has  clearly  omitted  no  opportunity  to  do  away 
with  these  things.  In  face  of  all  obstacles  she  has  wiped 
out  the  gambling  evil.  But  opium — which  is  worse — she 
cannot  spare.  Too  much  of  her  revenue  comes  from  this 
source.  The  figures  on  it  are  striking,  revealing  as  they 
do  how  enormously  her  increased  revenue  is  due  to  this 
source.  In  the  last  ten  years  (1906-7  to  1916-17)  the 
opium  revenue  has  grown  117  per  cent. — as  compared 
with  a total  growth  of  revenue  of  15  per  cent.  In  1915-16 
opium  supplied  21  2/5  per  cent,  of  the  total  revenue  for 
that  year,  more  than  double  the  land  revenue,  the  next 
most  productive  source.  And  in  1916-17  (the  last  year  for 
actuals)  it  amounted  to  23  1/1  per  cent,  of  the  total,  or 
almost  one-quarter  of  her  entire  current  resources.  For 
Siam  to  cut  off  this  one-quarter  of  her  funds,  in  view  of 
steadily  mounting  expenses,  would  be  suicidal.  In  face 
of  the  figures  she  is  helpless  to  effect  a change. 

(5)  The  injustice  of  thus  saddling  Siam  with  an 
opium  traffic  which  she  abhors,  but  upon  which  she  is 
dependent  for  her  very  life,  is  obvious. 

This  point  hardly  requires  comment.  The  facts  speak 
for  themselves. 

(6)  The  injustice  becomes  the  more  apparent  when 
we  realize  that  the  very  importation  of  opium,  let  alone 
its  use,  is  contrary  to  the  best  and  longest  established  of 
Siamese  traditions,  a country  which  itself  grows  no  opium 
and  is  not  addicted  to  its  use. 

In  the  earliest  ti*eaties,  recognition  was  accorded  to 
the  fact  that  opium  was  then  contraband  in  Siam,  and 
provision  was  made  for  summary  disposal  of  it  should 


28 


any  be  smuggled  in.  Such  treatment  of  the  drug 
was  the  then  established  policy  of  Government.  And 
smugglers  in  succeeding  laws  were  treated  with  the 
greatest  harshness,  the  penalty  for  second  offenses  being 
commonly  death.  Even  when  the  treaty  of  1855-56  forced 
a revision  of  this  policy  by  admitting  opium  free,  its 
importation  was  hedged  about  with  numerous  restrictions, 
limiting  its  sale  to  government  licensed  agents  and  other- 
wise keeping  it  within  control  of  Government.  This  gov- 
ernmental supervision  became  increasingly  rigid  as  time 
went  on,  until  by  1907  the  Government  had  itself  taken 
over  the  manufacture  of  the  raw  drug  and,  by  1918,  its 
sale  direct  to  the  user.  Provision  has  also  recently  been 
made  for  registration  of  all  smokers  and  for  hospitals  for 
opium  addicts.  Beginning  in  1907,  steps  were  taken  to 
close  the  opium  shops  in  Bangkok,  then  numbering  900, 
at  the  rate  of  100  a year,  until  there  should  be  only  200 
left.  Nothing  stands  in  the  way  of  eventual  eradication 
of  the  opium  evil  but  the  fact  that  Siam,  as  we  have  seen, 
cannot  get  on  without  the  money  which  it  brings  in.  She 
cannot  throw  over  a quarter  of  her  revenue  without  sup- 
plementing that  revenue  from  another  source. 

The  Powers  must  help.  Upon  them  rests  responsi- 
bility for  this  thing.  And  what  they  are  responsible  for, 
they  and  they  alone  have  power  to  cure. 

3.  As  To  Present-Day  Conditions  in  General. 

Siam  is  no  longer  in  European  eyes  the  country  of  an 
unknown  and  ununderstood  civilization  that  she  was 
in  1855,  and  what  was  formerly  hut  a means  of  self-preser- 
vation of  the  European  governments  and  peoples,  preser- 
vation of  their  laws  and  customs  in  a land  of  foreign  laws, 
preservation  of  their  rights  to  trade  as  against  concession- 


29 


hunting  rivals,  has  since  grown  into  an  instrument  of 
oppression  to  Siam  and  to  its  people. 

The  world  lias  changed  in  fifty  years,  and  Siam  and 
Europe  have  grown  in  knowledge  and  in  understanding 
of  one  another.  Siam’s  customs  are  no  longer  strange 
to  Europeans.  And  Siam  herself  has  quickened  through 
her  contacts  with  the  Western  world.  Enlightened  laws, 
prudent  and  efficient  administration,  unimpeached  integ- 
rity in  public  life,  financial  honesty,  all  these  things  Siam 
has  brought  out  of  her  past  and  fashioned  to  the  modern 
shape.  Graft,  that  bane  of  modern  society,  is  not  men- 
tioned in  anything  that  has  been  written  about  Siam. 
It  does  not  exist  there.  The  European  countries,  now 
that  they  know  her,  do  not  fear. 

Yet  the  system  lingers.  Its  weight  falls  on  the  people 
of  Siam.  They  suffer  the  vexatiousness  of  foreign  laws, 
they  pay  the  price — in  waning  native  industries,  in 
heavy  taxes  on  their  land,  in  opium. 

Conclusion. 

Siam,  who  fought  to  safeguard  the  existence  of  inde- 
pendent sovereign  countries  and  the  happiness  of  peoples 
everywhere,  expects,  with  the  help  of  her  brave  allies, 
to  safeguard  her  own  people  as  well,  and  with  that  end 
in  view  to  be  allowed  to  exercise  freely  all  the  rights  and 
attributes  which  naturally  appertain  thereto,  the  right  of 
jurisdiction,  and  of  levying  taxes  according  as  she  may 
see  fit,  rights  which  all  free  peoples  freely  exercise.  Of 
her  late  brothers  in  arms,  she  can  expect  no  less  than 
justice,  and  it  is  for  justice  that  she  asks. 


APPENDIX 


Treaty  Excerpts  Relating  to 
Ex-T  erritoriality 


and 


Limitations  Upon  Taxing  Power 


33 


I. 

EXTERRITORIALITY. 

Great  Britain. 

1826. 

(Treaty  with  the  King  of  Siam.  June  20,  1826.) 

Art.  I : 

“The  English  and  Siamese  engage  in  friendship,  love 
and  affection,  with  mutual  truth,  sincerity,  and  candour. 
The  Siamese  must  not  meditate  or  commit  evil,  so  as  to 
molest  the  English  in  any  manner.  The  English  must 
not  meditate  or  commit  evil,  so  as  to  molest  the  Siamese 
in  any  manner.  The  Siamese  must  not  go  and  molest, 
attack,  disturb,  seize,  or  take  any  place,  territory,  or 
boundary  belonging  to  the  English  in  any  Country  sub- 
ject to  the  English.  The  English  must  not  go  and  molest, 
attack,  disturb,  seize,  or  take  any  place,  territory,  or 
boundary  belonging  to  the  Siamese  in  any  Country  sub- 
ject to  the  Siamese.  The  Siamese  shall  settle  every  mat- 
ter within  the  Siamese  boundaries,  according  to  their 
own  will  and  customs.” 


1855-1856. 

( Treaty  of  Friendship  and  Commerce,  between 
Great  Britain  and  Siam. — Signed  at  Bangkok,  April 
18,  1855.) 

(Ratifications  exchanged  at  Bangkok,  April  5,  1856.) 
Art.  II: 

“II.  The  interests  of  all  British  subjects  coming  to 
Siam  shall  be  placed  under  the  regulation  and  control 


34 


of  a Consul,  who  will  be  appointed  to  reside  at  Bangkok : 
he  will  himself  conform  to,  and  will  enforce  the  observ- 
ance by  British  subjects  of,  all  the  provisions  of  this 
Treaty,  and  such  of  the  former  Treaty  negotiated  by 
Captain  Burney  in  1826,  as  shall  still  remain  in  opera- 
tion. He  shall  also  give  effect  to  all  rules  or  regulations 
that  are  now  or  may  hereafter  be  enacted  for  the  govern- 
ment of  British  subjects  in  Siam,  the  conduct  of  their 
trade,  and  for  the  prevention  of  violations  of  the  laws  of 
Siam.  Any  disputes  arising  between  British  and  Siamese 
subjects,  shall  be  heard  and  determined  by  the  Consul, 
in  conjunction  with  the  proper  Siamese  officers;  and 
criminal  offences  will  be  punished,  in  the  case  of  English 
offenders,  by  the  Consul,  according  to  English  laws,  and, 
in  the  case  of  Siamese  offenders,  by  their  own  laws, 
through  the  Siamese  authorities.  But  the  Consul  shall 
not  interfere  in  any  matters  referring  solely  to  Siamese, 
neither  will  the  Siamese  authorities  interfere  in  questions 
which  only  concern  the  subjects  of  Her  Britannic 
Majesty.” 

(Agreement  supplementary  to  the  Treaty  of 
Friendship  and  Commerce  between  Great  Britain  and 
Siam. — Signed  at  Bangkok,  May  13,  1856. 

Agreement  entered  into  between  Harry  Smith 
Parkes,  Esq.,  on  the  part  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty’s 
Government,  and  the  under-mentioned  Royal  Com- 
missioners, on  the  part  of  Their  Majesties  the  First 
and  Second  Kings  of  Siam.  ) 

Art.  II : 

“With  reference  to  the  punishment  of  offences,  or  the 
settlement  of  disputes,  it  is  agreed: 


35 


“That  all  criminal  cases  in  which  both  parties  are 
British  subjects,  or  in  which  the  defendant  is  a British 
subject,  shall  be  tried  and  determined  by  the  British 
Consul  alone.  All  criminal  cases  in  which  both  parties 
are  Siamese,  or  in  which  the  defendant  is  a Siamese,  shall 
be  tried  and  determined  by  the  Siamese  authorities  alone. 

“That  all  civil  cases  in  which  both  parties  are  British 
subjects,  or  in  which  the  defendant  is  a British  subject, 
shall  be  heard  and  determined  by  the  British  Consul 
alone.  All  civil  cases  in  which  both  parties  are  Siamese, 
or  in  which  the  defendant  is  a Siamese,  shall  be  heard 
and  determined  by  the  Siamese  authorities  alone.” 

1856. 

( British  Order  in  Counsel,  providing  for  the  Exer- 
cise of  British  Jurisdiction  in  Siam. — July  28,  1856.) 

At  the  Court  at  Osborne  House,  Isle  of  Wight,  the  28tli 
day  of  July,  1856. 

Present 

The  Queen’s  Most  Excellent  Majesty  in  Council. 

“IV.  And  it  is  further  ordered,  that  any  charge 
against  a British  subject  for  a breach  of  rules  and  regu- 
lations, other  than  those  relating  to  the  observance  of 
Treaties,  shall  in  like  maimer  be  heard  and  determined 
by  Her  Majesty's  Consul;  and  in  all  cases  in  which  the 
penalty  shall  not  exceed  200  dollars  or  one  month’s  im- 
prisonment, the  Consul  shall  hear  and  determine  the 
charge  summarily,  without  the  aid  of  assessors;  but 
where  the  penalty  attached  to  a breach  of  the  rules  and 
regulations  other  than  those  relating  to  the  observance 
of  Treaties  shall  amount  to  more  than  200  dollars,  or 


36 


to  imprisonment  for  more  than  one  month,  the  Consul, 
before  he  shall  proceed  to  hear  the  charge,  shall  summon 
2 British  subjects  of  good  repute  to  sit  with  him  as  as- 
sessors, which  assessors  shall,  however,  have  no  authority 
to  decide  on  the  innocence  or  guilt  of  the  party  charged, 
or  on  the  amount  of  fine  or  imprisonment  to  be  awarded 
to  him  on  conviction;  but  it  shall  rest  with  the  Consul 
to  decide  on  the  guilt  or  innocence  of  the  party  charged, 
and  on  the  amount  of  fine  or  imprisonment  to  be  awarded 
to  him  : provided  always,  that  in  no  case  shall  the  penalty 
to  be  attached  to  a breach  of  rules  and  regulations  other 
than  those  for  the  observance  of  Treaties  exceed  500  dol- 
lars, or  3 months’  imprisonment;  and  provided  further, 
that  in  the  event  of  the  said  assessors,  or  either  of  them, 
dissenting  from  the  conviction  of  the  party  charged,  or 
from  the  penalty  of  fine  or  imprisonment  awarded  to 
him  by  the  Consul,  the  Consul  shall  take  a note  of  such 
dissent,  with  the  grounds  thereof  and  shall  require  good 
and  sufficient  security  for  the  appearance  of  the  party 
convicted  at  a future  time,  in  order  to  undergo  his  sen- 
tence or  receive  his  discharge ; and  the  Consul  shall,  with 
as  little  delay  as  possible,  report  his  decision,  with  all 
the  particulars  of  the  case,  together  with  the  dissent  of 
the  assessors,  or  either  of  them,  and  the  grounds  thereof, 
to  Her  Majesty's  Principal  Secretary  of  State  for  For- 
eign Affairs,  and  Her  Majesty’s  Principal  Secretary  of 
State  of  Foreign  Affairs  shall  have  authority  to  confirm, 
or  vary,  or  reverse  the  decision  of  the  Consul,  as  to  him 
may  seem  fit. 

“V.  And  it  is  further  ordered,  that  it  shall  be  lawful 
for  Her  Majesty’s  Consul  to  hear  and  determine  any 


37 


suit  of  a civil  nature  against  a British  subject,  arising 
within  any  part  of  the  dominions  of  the  Kings  of  Siam, 
whether  such  suit  be  instituted  by  a subject  of  the  Kings 
of  Siam  or  by  a subject  or  citizen  of  a foreign  State  in 
amity  with  Her  Majesty;  and  if  either  or  any  party  in 
such  suit  shall  be  dissatisfied  with  the  decision  given  by 
such  Consul,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  such  party,  within 
15  days,  to  give  to  the  Consul  notice  of  appeal  to  the 
Supreme  Court  in  Her  Majesty’s  possession  of  Singapore; 
whereupon  the  Consul  shall,  with  as  little  delay  as  pos- 
sible, transmit  all  the  documents  which  were  produced 
before  him  and  none  other,  together  with  a statement 
of  the  grounds  on  which  he  has  formed  his  decision,  to 
the  said  Supreme  Court,  and  shall  forthwith  modify  to 
the  several  parties  the  transmission  of  the  process:  pro- 
vided always,  that  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  Consul  to 
require  from  any  party  appealing  to  the  said  Supreme 
Court  reasonable  security,  which  shall  consist  in  part 
of  one  or  two  sufficient  sureties,  to  be  approved  by  the 
Consul,  that  such  party  shall  abide  by  the  decisions  to 
be  given  by  the  said  Supreme  Court,  and,  if  such  appeal 
shall  fail,  to  answer  all  costs,  loss,  and  damages  sustained 
by  the  other  party  in  consequence  of  such  appeal. 

“VI.  And  it  is  further  ordered,  that  it  shall  be  lawful 
for  Her  Majesty's  Consul,  in  like  manner,  to  hear  and 
determine  any  suit  of  a civil  nature,  arising  within  any 
part  of  the  dominions  of  the  Kings  of  Siam,  instituted 
by  a British  subject  against  a subject  of  the  Kings  of 
Siam,  or  against  a subject  or  citizen  of  a foreign  State 
in  amity  with  Her  Majesty,  provided  that  the  defendant 
in  such  suit  shall  consent  to  submit  to  his  jurisdiction, 
and  give  sufficient  security  that  he  will  abide  by  the  de- 


38 


cision  of  the  Consul,  or,  in  ease  of  appeal,  by  that  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  Her  Majesty’s  possession  of  Singa- 
pore, and  will  pay  such  expenses  as  the  Consul  or  the 
said  Supreme  Court  shall  adjudge;  and  if  either  or  any 
party  in  such  suit  shall  be  dissatisfied  with  the  decision 
given  by  such  Consul,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  such  party, 
within  15  days,  to  give  to  the  Consul  notice  of  appeal 
to  the  said  Supreme  Court,  and  the  proceedings  in  such 
a suit,  or  in  an  appeal  arising  therefrom,  shall  be  con- 
formable to,  and  under  the  same  conditions  as,  the  pro- 
ceedings in  a suit,  or  in  an  appeal  arising  therefrom,  in 
which  a British  subject  is  defendant,  and  a subject  of 
the  Kings  of  Siam,  or  a subject  or  citizen  of  a foreign 
State  in  amity  with  Her  Majesty,  is  plaintiff.” 

1883. 

(Treaty  Between  Great  Britain  and  Siam,  for  the 
Prevention  of  Crime  in  the  Territories  of  Chiengmai, 
Lakon,  and  Lampoonchi,  and  for  the  Promotion  of 
Commerce  Between  British  Burmah  and  the  Terri- 
tories Aforesaid. — Signed  at  Bangkok,  September  3, 
1883.) 

(Ratifications  exchanged  May  7,  1884.) 

Arts.  VII-IX: 

“VII.  The  interests  of  all  British  subjects  coming  to 
Chiengmai,  Lakon,  and  Lampoonchi  shall  be  placed  under 
the  regulations  and  control  of  a British  Consul  or  Vice- 
Consul,  who  will  be  appointed  to  reside  at  Chiengmai, 
with  power  to  exercise  civil  and  criminal  jurisdiction  in 
accordance  with  the  provisions  of  Article  II  of  the  Sup- 
plementary Agreement  of  the  13th  May,  1856,  subject 
to  Article  VIII  of  the  present  Treaty. 


39 


“VIII.  His  Majesty  the  King  of  Siam  will  appoint  a 
proper  person  or  persons  to  be  a Commissioner  and  Judge, 
or  Commissioners  and  Judges,  in  Chiengmai  for  the  pur- 
poses hereinafter  mentioned.  Such  Judge  or  Judges 
shall,  subject  to  the  limitations  and  provisions  contained 
in  the  present  Treaty,  exercise  civil  and  criminal  juris- 
diction in  all  cases  arising  in  Chiengmai,  Lakon,  and 
Lampoonchi,  between  British  subjects,  or  in  which  Brit- 
ish subjects  may  be  parties  as  complainants,  accused, 
plaintiffs,  or  defendants,  according  to  Siamese  law ; pro- 
vided always,  that  in  all  such  cases  the  Consul  or  Vice- 
Consul  shall  be  entitled  to  be  present  at  the  trial,  and  to 
be  furnished  with  copies  of  the  proceedings,  which,  when 
the  defendant  or  accused  is  a British  subject,  shall  be 
supplied  free  of  charge,  and  to  make  any  suggestions  to 
the  Judge  or  Judges  which  he  may  think  proper  in  the 
interests  of  justice;  provided  also,  that  the  Consul  or 
Vice-Consul  shall  have  power  at  any  time,  before  judg- 
ment, if  he  shall  think  proper  in  the  interests  of  justice, 
by  a written  requisition  under  his  hand,  directed  to  the 
Judge  or  Judges,  to  signify  his  desire  that  any  case  in 
which  both  parties  are  British  subjects,  or  in  which  the 
accused  or  defendant  is  a British  subject,  be  transferred 
for  adjudication  to  the  British  Consular  Court  at  Chieng- 
mai, and  the  case  shall  thereupon  be  transferred  to  such 
last-mentioned  Court  accordingly,  and  be  disposed  of  by 
the  Consul  or  Vice-Consul,  as  provided  by  Article  II  of  the 
Supplementary  Agreement  of  the  13th  May,  1856. 

“The  Consul  or  Vice-Consul  shall  have  access,  at  all 
reasonable  times,  to  any  British  subject  who  may  be  im- 
prisoned under  a sentence  or  order  of  the  said  Judge  or 
Judges,  and,  if  he  shall  think  fit,  may  require  that  the 


40 


prisoner  be  removed  to  the  Consular  Prison,  there  to 
undergo  the  residue  of  his  term  of  imprisonment. 

“The  Tariff  of  Court  fees  shall  be  published,  and  shall 
be  equally  binding  on  all  parties  concerned,  whether  Brit- 
ish or  Siamese. 

“IX.  In  civil  and  criminal  cases  in  which  British  sub- 
jects may  be  parties,  and  which  shall  be  tried  before  the 
said  Judge  or  Judges,  either  party  shall  be  entitled  to 
appeal  to  Bangkok;  if  a British  subject,  with  the  sanc- 
tion and  consent  of  the  British  Consul  or  Vice-Consul, 
and  in  other  cases  by  leave  of  the  presiding  Judge  or 
Judges. 

“In  all  such  cases  a transcript  of  the  evidence,  to- 
gether with  a Report  from  the  presiding  Judge  or  Judges, 
shall  be  forwarded  to  Bangkok,  and  the  appeal  shall  be 
disposed  of  there,  by  the  Siamese  authorities  and  Her 
Britannic  Majesty’s  Consul-General  in  consultation. 

“Provided  always  that  in  all  cases  where  the  de- 
fendants or  accused  are  Siamese  subjects,  the  final  decis- 
ion on  appeal  shall  rest  with  the  Siamese  authorities; 
and  that  in  all  other  cases  in  which  British  subjects  are 
parties,  the  final  decision  on  appeal  shall  rest  with  Her 
Britannic  Majesty’s  Consul-General. 

“Pending  the  result  of  the  appeal,  the  judgment  of  the 
Court  at  Cliiengmai  shall  be  suspended  on  such  terms  and 
conditions  (if  any)  as  shall  be  agreed  upon  between  the 
said  Judge  or  Judges  and  the  Consul  or  Vice-Consul. 

“In  such  cases  of  appeal,  as  above  set  forth,  the  ap- 
peal must  be  entered  in  the  Court  of  Cliiengmai  within  a 
month  of  the  original  verdict,  and  must  be  presented  at 
Bangkok  within  a reasonable  time,  to  be  determined  by 


41 


the  Court  at  Chiengmai,  failing  which  the  appeal  will  be 
thrown  out  of  Court.” 

“Annex. 

Mr.  Satow  to  Chao  Phya  Bhanuwongse. 

Bangkok,  December  31,  1884.” 

“I  have  the  honour  to  acquaint  your  Excellency  that 
Her  Majesty’s  Government  having  been  acquainted  with 
the  desire  of  His  Majesty  the  King  of  Siam  that  the 
stipulations  of  the  Treaty  of  the  3rd  September,  1883, 
relating  to  the  territories  of  Chiengmai,  Lakhon,  and 
Lampoonchi,  by  which  among  other  matters  it  is  pro- 
vided that  the  Siamese  Courts  shall,  in  the  first  instance, 
exercise  civil  and  criminal  jurisdiction  over  British  sub- 
jects in  all  cases  arising  in  those  territories,  should  be 
extended  to  the  territories  of  Muang  Nan  and  Phre,  have 
instructed  me  to  express  to  the  Government  of  His  Maj- 
esty the  King  their  concurrence  in  this  arrangement. 

“The  words  Chiengmai,  Lakhon,  and  Lampoonchi,  in 
the  Treaty  of  1883,  being  thus  taken  to  include  the  terri- 
tories of  Muang  Nan  and  Phre,  it  would  appear  that  a 
similar  extension  of  meaning  should  be  given  to  those 
words  as  occurring  in  Mr.  Gould's  Commission.” 

1889. 

( British  Order  in  Council,  providing  for  the  exer- 
cise of  Her  Majesty’s  Jurisdiction  in  Siam.  Windsor, 
November  28,  1889.) 

“Part  IV. — General  Powers  of  Courts  and  General 

Procedure. 

“13. — (1)  All  Her  Majesty's  jurisdiction,  civil  and 
criminal,  exercisable  in  Siam,  shall,  except  as  otherwise 


42 


provided  by  this  Order,  be  exercisable  by  the  District 
Courts  each  for  and  within  its  own  district.” 

* * * * # * * 
“Part  XII. — Foreigners  and  Foreign  Courts. 

89.  (a)  Where  a foreigner  desires  to  institute  or  take 
a suit  or  proceeding  of  a civil  nature  against  a British 
subject,  or  a British  subject  to  institute  or  take  a suit 
or  proceeding  of  a civil  nature  against  a foreigner,  a 
District  Court  may  entertain  the  suit  or  proceeding,  and 
hear  and  determine  it  (and  if  all  parties  desire,  or  the 
Court  directs  a trial  witli  a jury  or  assessors,  then  with 
a jury  or  assessors)  at  a place  where  such  a trial  might 
be  had  if  all  parties  were  British  subjects,  and  in  all 
other  respects  according  to  the  ordinary  course  of  the 
Court. 

“(6)  Provided  that  the  foreigner  (i)  first  files  in  the 
Court  his  consent  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Court;  and 
(ii)  also,  if  required  by  the  Court,  obtains  and  files  a 
certificate  in  writing  from  a competent  authority  of  his 
own  Government  to  the  effect  that  no  objection  is  made 
by  that  Government  to  the  foreigner  submitting  in  the 
particular  cause  or  matter  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
Court;  and  (iii)  also,  if  required  by  the  Court,  gives 
security  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  Court,  to  such  reason- 
able amounts  as  the  Court  directs,  by  deposit  of  money 
or  otherwise,  to  pay  fees,  costs,  damages,  and  expenses, 
and  to  abide  by  and  perform  the  decision  to  be  given  by 
the  Court  or  on  appeal.” 


43 


1896. 

(Notes  exchanged  between  Great  Britain  and 
Siam,  extending  the  Operation  in  Siam  of  the  Treaty 
of  September  3,  1883. — Bangkok,  September  29,  Octo- 
ber 28,  1896.) 

No.  % — Mr.  de  Bunsen  to  Prince  Devawongse. 

Bangkok,  September  29,  1896. 

“The  Consular  district  in  question  having  since  been 
further  extended  to  include  the  additional  provinces 
named  in  Mr.  Archer’s  Commission  as  Consul,  viz.,  Muang 
Thon,  Raheng,  Sawankaloke,  Sukotai,  Utaradit,  and 
Pichai,  I desire  to  propose  by  this  note  that  those  addi- 
tional provinces  be  in  the  same  way  held  by  the  British 
and  Siamese  Governments  to  fall  within  the  scope  of  the 
above-mentioned  Treaty  of  September  1883,  by  which, 
among  other  matters,  it  is  provided  that  a specially  con- 
stituted Siamese  Court  shall,  in  the  first  instance,  exercise 
civil  and  criminal  jurisdiction,  under  express  conditions 
as  to  Consular  intervention,  over  British  subjects  con- 
cerned in  civil  or  in  criminal  cases.” 


1903. 

(British  Order  in  Council,  regulating  His  Maj- 
esty’s Jurisdiction  in  Siam. — Buckingham  Palace, 
February  16,  1903.) 

“Part  II. — Constitution  and  Powers  of  Courts. 

“(1.)  Court  for  Siam. 

“7.— (1)  There  shall  be  a Court  styled  ‘His  Britannic 
Majesty’s  Court  for  Siam’  (in  this  Order  referred  to  as 


44 


the  Court  for  Siam,  and  comprised  in  the  term  ‘the 
Court’).” 

“(4.)  Powers  of  Courts. 
******* 

“15.  The  Court  for  Siam  shall  ordinarily  sit  at  Bang- 
kok; but  may,  on  emergency,  sit  at  any  other  place  in 
Siam,  and  may  at  any  time  transfer  its  ordinary  sittings 
to  any  such  place  as  the  Secretary  of  State  approves. 
Under  this  Article  the  Judge  and  an  Assistant  Judge  may 
sit  at  the  same  time  at  different  places,  and  each  sitting 
shall  be  deemed  to  be  a sitting  of  the  Court  for  Siam. 

“16.  The  Judge  of  the  Court  for  Siam  may  visit,  in  a 
magisterial  or  judicial  capacity,  any  place  in  Siam,  and 
there  inquire  of,  or  hear  and  determine,  any  case,  civil 
or  criminal,  and  may  examine  any  records  or  other  docu- 
ments in  any  District  Court,  and  give  directions  as  to  the 
keeping  thereof.” 


1909. 

(Treaty  and  Notes  between  Great  Britain  and 
Siam  regarding  the  Cession  and  Boundaries  of  the 
Siamese  Malay  States,  the  Jurisdiction  of  the 
Siamese  Courts,  and  the  Non-Cession,  &c.,  of  Siamese 
Territory. — Signed  at  Bangkok,  March  10,  1909.) 

(Ratification  exchanged  at  London,  July  9,  1909.) 
Art.  V : 

“V.  The  jurisdiction  of  the  Siamese  International 
Courts,  established  by  Article  VIII  of  the  Treaty  of  the 
3rd  September,  1883,  shall,  under  the  conditions  defined 
in  the  Jurisdiction  Protocol,  annexed  hereto,  be  ex- 


45 


tended  to  all  British  subjects  in  Siam,  registered  at  the 
British  consulates  before  the  date  of  the  present  Treaty. 

“This  system  shall  come  to  an  end,  and  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  the  International  Courts  shall  be  transferred  to 
the  ordinary  Siamese  Courts  after  the  promulgation  and 
the  coming  into  force  of  the  Siamese  Codes,  namely,  the 
Penal  Code,  the  Civil  and  Commercial  Codes,  the  Codes  of 
Procedure  and  the  Law  for  Organisation  of  Courts. 

“All  other  British  subjects  in  Siam  shall  be  subject 
to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  ordinary  Siamese  Courts  under 
the  conditions  defined  in  the  Jurisdiction  Protocol.” 

(Annex  2.) 

(Protocol  Concerning  the  Jurisdiction  Applicable 
in  the  Kingdom  of  Siam  to  British  Subjects,  and 
Annexed  to  the  Treaty  Dated  March  10,  1909. ) 


“2.  The  jurisdiction  of  the  International  Courts  shall 
extend — 

“(1.)  In  civil  matters:  To  all  civil  and  commercial 
matters  to  which  British  subjects  shall  be  parties. 

“(2.)  In  penal  matters:  To  breaches  of  law  of  every 
kind,  whether  committed  by  British  subjects  or  to  their 
injury. 

“3.  The  right  of  evocation  in  the  International  Courts 
shall  be  exercised  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of 
Article  VIII  of  the  Treaty  of  the  3rd  September,  1883. 

“The  right  of  evocation  shall  cease  to  be  exercised  in 
all  matters  coming  within  the  scope  of  codes  or  laws 
regularly  promulgated  as  soon  as  the  text  of  such  codes 
or  laws  shall  have  been  communicated  to  the  British  Lega- 


46 


tion  in  Bangkok.  There  shall  be  an  understanding  be- 
tween the  Ministry  for  Foreign  Affairs  and  the  British 
Legation  at  Bangkok  for  the  disposal  of  cases  pending  at 
the  time  that  the  said  codes  and  laws  are  communicated. 

“4.  In  all  cases,  whether  in  the  International  Courts 
or  in  the  ordinary  Siamese  Courts  in  which  a British  sub- 
ject is  defendant  or  accused,  a European  legal  adviser 
shall  sit  in  the  Court  of  First  Instance. 

“In  cases  in  which  a British-born  or  naturalized  sub- 
ject not  of  Asiatic  descent  may  be  a party,  a European 
adviser  shall  sit  as  a Judge  in  the  Court  of  First  Instance, 
and  where  such  British  subject  is  defendant  or  accused 
the  opinion  of  the  adviser  shall  prevail. 

“A  British  subject  who  is  in  the  position  of  defendant 
or  accused  in  any  case  arising  in  the  provinces  may  apply 
for  a change  of  venue,  and  should  the  Court  consider 
such  change  desirable  the  trial  shall  take  place  either  at 
Bangkok  or  before  the  Judge  in  whose  Court  the  case 
would  be  tried  at  Bangkok.  Notice  of  any  such  applica- 
tion shall  be  given  to  the  British  Consular  Officer. 
**♦##** 

“The  judgment  on  appeal  from  either  the  Interna- 
tional Courts  or  the  ordinary  Siamese  Courts  shall  bear 
the  signature  of  two  European  Judges.” 


47 


France, 

1856. 

(Decret  Imperial  portant  promulgation  du 
Trait£:  d’AmitUs,  de  Commerce  et  de  Navigation,  conclu 
LE  15  AoCT,  1856,  ENTRE  LA  FRANCE  ET  LE  SIAM. — PARIS, 
LE  28  DfiCEMBRE,  1857.) 

“VIII.  Le  Consul  de  France  s’abstiendra  de  toute 
intervention  dans  les  contestations  entre  sujets  Siamois 
ou  entre  des  Siamois  et  des  etrangers.  De  leur  cote,  les 
Frangais  dependront,  pour  toutes  les  difficultes  qui  pour- 
raient  s’elever  entre  eux,  de  la  juri diction  Frangais,  et 
l’autorite  Siamoise  n'aura  a s’en  meler  en  aucune  maniere, 
non  plus  que  des  differends  qui  surviendraient  entre 
Frangais  et  etrangers,  it  moins  que  ces  differends, 
d£generant  en  rixes  it  main  armee,  ne  la  forcent  it  inter- 
venir.  Comme  il  y aurait,  dans  ce  cas,  contravention  aux 
lois  du  pays,  le  Consul  devra  constater  la  nature  du  d61it, 
et  punir  les  coupables. 

“L’autorite  Siamoise  n’aura  pareillement  it  exercer 
aucune  action  sur  les  navires  de  commerce  Frangais; 
ceux-ci  ne  releveront  que  de  l’autorit6  Frangaise  et  du 
capitaine.  Seulement,  en  l’absence  de  biltiments  de 
guerre  Frangais,  l’autoritti  Siamoise  devra,  lorsqu’elle  en 
sera  requise  par  le  Consul  de  France,  lui  preter  main- 
forte  pour  faire  respecter  son  autorite  par  ses  nationaux, 
et  pour  maintenir  le  bon  ordre  et  la  discipline  parmi  les 
Equipages  des  navires  de  commerce  Frangais. 

“IX.  Les  Frangais  seront  egalement  r£gis  par  la  loi 
Frangaise  pour  la  repression  de  tous  les  crimes  et  dtilits 


48 


commis  par  eux  dans  le  Royaume  de  Siam.  Les  coupables 
seront  recherclies  et  arretes  par  les  autorites  Siamoises,  a 
la  diligence  du  Consul  de  France,  anquel  ils  devront  etre 
remis,  et  qui  se  chargera  de  les  faire  punir  conformement 
anx  lois  Frangaises.  Si  des  Siamois  se  rendent  coupable 
de  delits  on  de  crimes  envers  des  Frangais,  ils  seront 
arretes  par  l’autorite  Siamoise  et  livres  h la  severite  des 
lois  du  Royaume.” 


1904. 

(Convention  between  France  and  Siam,  modifying 
the  Stipulations  of  the  Treaty  of  the  3rd  October, 
1893,  REGARDING  TERRITORIAL  BOUNDARIES  AND  OTHER  AR- 
RANGEMENTS. ) 

(Ratifications  exchanged  at  Paris,  December  9,  1904.) 

“XII.  En  ce  qui  concerne  la  juridiction  it  laquelle 
seront  desormais  sonmis,  sans  ancune  exception,  tous  les 
Frangais  et  proteges  Frangais  an  Siam,  les  deux  Gou- 
vernements  conviennent  de  substituer  aux  dispositions 
existantes  les  dispositions  suivantes : — 

1.  En  matiere  penale,  les  Frangais  on  proteges  Fran- 
gais ne  seront  justiciables  que  de  l’autorite  judiciaire 
Frangaise ; 

2.  En  matiere  civile,  tout  proces  intente  par  un 
Siamois  contre  un  Frangais  ou  protege  Frangais  sera 
porte  devant  le  Tribunal  Consnlaire  Frangais. 

“Tout  proces  dans  lequel  le  defendeur  sera  Siamois 
sera  porte  devant  la  Cour  Siamoise  des  causes  etrangeres 
institute  h Bangkok. 

“Par  exception,  dans  les  provinces  de  Xieng-Mai,  Lak- 
hon,  Lamponn,  et  Xan,  tous  les  proces  civils  et  criminels 


49 


interessant  les  ressortissants  Frangais  seront  portes 
devant  la  Cour  Internationale  Siamoise. 

“Mais  il  est  entendu  que,  dans  tous  ces  proces,  le 
Consul  de  France  aura  le  droit  d'assister  aux  audiences 
ou  de  s’y  faire  representer  par  un  Delegue  dument 
autorise  et  de  formuler  toutes  observations  qui  lui  sem- 
bleront  convenables  dans  l'interet  de  la  justice. 

“Au  cas  oil  le  defendeur  serait  Frangais  ou  protege 
Frangais,  le  Consul  de  France  pourra,  il  tout  moment  au 
cours  de  la  procedure,  s'il  le  juge  opportun  et  moyennant 
une  requisition  ecrite,  evoquer  l'affaire  en  cause. 

“Celle-ci  sera  alors  transferee  au  Tribunal  Consulaire 
Frangais,  qui  sera,  il  partir  de  ce  moment,  seul  competent, 
et  auquel  les  autorites  Siamoises  seront  tenues  de  preter 
le  concours  de  leurs  bons  offices. 

“Les  appels  des  jugements  rendus  taut  par  la  Cour 
des  Causes  Etrangeres  que  par  la  Cour  Internationale, 
pour  les  quatre  provinces  susmentionnees,  seront  portes 
devant  la  Cour  d’ Appel  de  Bangkok.” 

1907. 

(Treaty  retween  France  and  Siam  regulating 

QUESTIONS  CONNECTED  WITH  THE  FRONTIERS  OF  INDO- 

China  and  Siam,  Jurisdiction,  and  the  position  of 
French  Asiatic  subjects. — Signed  at  Bangkok,  March 
23,  1907.) 

(Ratifications  exchanged  at  Paris,  June  21,  1907.) 
Article  V : 

“Tous  les  Asiatiques  sujets  et  proteges  Frangais,  qui 
se  feront  inscrire  dans  les  Consulats  de  France  au  Siam 
apres  la  signature  du  present  Traite,  par  application  de 


50 


l’Article  XI  de  la  Convention  du  13  Fevrier,  1904,  seront 
justiciables  des  Tribunaux  Siamois  ordinaires. 

“La  juridiction  des  Cours  Internationales  Siamoises, 
dont  restitution  est  pr6vue  par  l’Article  XII  de  la  Con- 
vention du  13  Fevrier,  1904,  sera,  dans  les  conditions 
enonc6es  au  Protocole  de  Juridiction  ci  annexe,  6tendue, 
dans  tout  le  Royaume  de  Siam,  aux  Asiatiques  sujets 
et  proteges  Frangais  vises  par  les  Articles  X et  XI  de  la 
meme  Convention,  et  actuellement  inscrits  dans  les  Con- 
sulats  de  France  au  Siam. 

“Ce  regime  prendra  fin  et  la  competence  des  Cours 
Internationales  sera  transferee  aux  Tribunaux  Siamois 
ordinaires,  apres  la  promulgation  et  la  mise  en  vigueur 
des  Codes  Siamois  (Code  Penal,  Code  Civil  et  Com- 
mercial, Codes  de  Procedure,  Loi  d’ Organisation 
Judiciaire) .” 

Annexe  II : 

Clause  II. 

“La  competence  des  Cours  Internationales  s’etend: 

“1.  En  matiere  civile:  k toutes  matures  civiles  ou 
commerciales  dans  lesquelles  des  Asiatiques  sujets  ou 
proteges  Frangais  seront  en  cause : 

“2.  En  matiere  penale:  aux  infractions  de  toute 
nature  commises  soit  par  des  Asiatiques  sujets  ou  proteges 
Frangais,  soit  & leur  prejudice. 

Clause  III. 

“Dans  les  Provinces  d’Udorn  et  d’lsarn,  la  juridiction 
des  Cours  Internationales  s’etendra  provisoirement  & 
tous  les  Asiatiques  sujets  et  proteges  Frangais,  quelle  que 


51 


soit  la  date  de  leur  inscription  sur  les  registres  des  Con- 
sults de  France. 

Clause  IV. 

“Le  droit  d’6vocation  s’exercera  conform6ment  aux 
dispositions  de  l’Article  XII  de  la  Convention  du  13 
Fevrier,  1904. 

“Toutefois,  ce  droit  cessera  de  s’exercer  pour  toutes 
matieres  qui  feront  l’objet  de  Codes  ou  de  Lois  reguliere- 
ment  promulguees  d&s  que  ces  Codes  ou  ces  Lois  auront 
6t6  communiques  h la  Legation  de  France,  et  qu'ils  auront 
ete  mis  en  vigueur. 

******* 

Clause  V. 

“Toutes  requetes  & fin  d’appel  contre  les  jugements 
des  cours  Internationales  de  Premiere  Instance  seront 
communiquees  au  Consul  de  France,  qui  aura  le  droit  de 
donner  sur  P affaire  un  avis  ecrit  pour  etre  joint  au 
dossier. 

“L’arret  d’appel  devra  porter  la  signature  de  deux 
Juges  Europ6ens.” 

1908. 

(French  Decree  relating  to  the  Organization  of 
Criminal  Jurisdiction  in  Siam  as  affecting  French 

SUBJECTS  AND  PROTECTED  PERSONS  OF  ASIATIC  ORIGIN. 

— Paris,  September  17,  1908. ) 

“D’aprbs  ce  syst&me,  tous  ces  sujets  et  proteges 
deviennent  provisoirement  justiciables  des  cours  dites 
internationales ; nais  dans  tous  les  proems  les  interessant, 


52 


nos  consuls  out  le  droit  d'assister  aux  audiences  ou  de 
s'y  faire  representer  par  un  ddlegue,  de  formuler  toutes 
les  observations  qui  leur  semblent  convenables  et  enfin, 
si  notre  ressortissant  est  defendeur,  d'evoquer  l'affaire 
it  tout  moment  de  la  procedure.  Le  droit  ainsi  consenti 
par  le  Gouvernement  siamois  est  apparu  comme  la 
contre-partie  necessaire  de  la  reconciation  que  nous 
consentions  k nos  anciens  privileges.” 


53 


United  States, 

1833. 

(Treaty  of  Amity  and  Commerce  between  the 
United  States  and  Siam. — Signed  at  Sia-Yut'hia 
(Bangkok),  20tli  March,,  1833.) 

“IX.  Merchants  of  The  United  States  trading  in  the 
Kingdom  of  Siam  shall  respect  and  follow  the  Laws  and 
customs  of  the  Country  in  all  points.” 

1856. 

(Treaty  of  Peace,  Friendship,  Commerce  and  Navi- 
gation, between  The  United  States  and  Siam. — Signed 
at  Bangkok,  May  29,  1856.) 

(Ratifications  exchanged  at  Bangkok,  June  15,  1857.) 

Art.  II. 

“Any  disputes  arising  between  American  citizens  and 
Siamese  subjects  shall  be  heard  and  determined  by  the 
Consul,  in  conjunction  with  the  proper  Siamese  officers; 
and  criminal  offences  will  be  punished,  in  the  case  of 
American  offenders,  by  the  Consul,  according  to  Ameri- 
can laws,  and  in  the  case  of  Siamese  offenders,  by  their 
own  laws,  through  the  Siamese  authorities.  But  the 
Consul  shall  not  interfere  in  any  matters  referring  solely 
to  Siamese;  neither  will  the  Siamese  authorities  interfere 
in  questions  which  only  concern  the  citizens  of  The  United 
States.” 


54 


Italy, 

1868. 

(Treaty  of  Friendship,  Commerce,  and  Navigation, 
between  Italy  and  Siam. — Signed  in  London,  October 
3,  1868.) 

(Ratifications  exchanged  at  Bangkok,  1st  January,  1871.) 

“IX.  Any  dispute  or  controversy  between  Italian  and 
Siamese  subjects,  shall  be  settled  by  the  Diplomatic 
Representative,  or  jointly  by  the  Consuls  and  the  func- 
tionaries of  Siam.  Criminal  cases  shall  be  adjudged  by 
the  Legation  or  the  Consulates  if  the  delinquent  be  an 
Italian,  and  by  the  local  authorities  if  he  be  a Siamese 
subject. 

“But  neither  the  Legation  nor  the  Consulates  shall 
interfere  in  matters  affecting  Siamese  subjects  only,  nor 
shall  the  local  authorities  interfere  in  questions  relating 
purely  to  Italian  subjects.” 

1905. 

(Supplemental  Convention  between  Italy  and 
Siam  modifying  Articles  VIII  and  IX  of  the  Treaty 
of  Friendship,  Commerce,  and  Navigation  of  October 
3,  1868. — Signed  at  Paris,  April  8,  1905.) 

(Ratifications  exchanged  at  Paris  October  7,  1905.) 

“III.  With  regard  to  the  jurisdiction  to  which  in  the 
future  without  any  exception  all  Italian  subjects  in  Siam 
will  be  subjected,  the  two  Governments  agree: 

“1.  In  criminal  matters,  if  the  offender  be  an  Italian 
subject,  he  shall  be  tried  and  punished  by  the  Italian 
Judicial  Consular  Officer; 


55 


“2.  In  civil  matters,  all  actions  brought  by  a Siamese 
against  an  Italian  subject  shall  be  heard  before  the  Italian 
Judicial  Consular  Officer. 

“If  the  defendant  is  a Siamese,  the  action  shall  be 
heard  by  the  Siamese  Court  for  Foreign  Causes ; 

“3.  But  in  the  provinces  of  Chiengmai,  Lakhon,  Lam- 
poon and  Nan,  all  civil  or  criminal  cases  to  which  an 
Italian  subject  may  be  a party,  shall  be  heard  before  the 
Siamese  International  Court. 

“In  any  of  the  cases  mentioned  in  paragraph  3 of 
this  Article,  the  Italian  Judicial  Consular  Officer  shall 
have  the  right  to  be  present  at  the  trial  or  to  be  repre- 
sented there  by  a duly  authorized  delegate  and  to  make 
any  observations  which  he  may  deem  proper  in  the  inter- 
est of  justice. 

“In  cases  where  the  defendant  is  an  Italian  subject, 
the  Italian  Judicial  Consular  Officer  may,  at  any  stage  in 
the  proceedings,  if  he  thinks  proper,  by  means  of  a written 
requisition  evoke  the  case  before  him. 

“Such  a case  shall  then  be  transferred  to  the  Italian 
Judicial  Consular  Officer,  who  shall  from  that  time  for- 
ward alone  be  competent  to  try  the  case,  and  to  whom  the 
Siamese  authorities  shall  be  bound  to  give  their  assistance. 

“Appeals  from  the  judgments  rendered  by  the  Court 
for  Foreign  Causes,  as  well  as  by  the  International  Court 
established  in  the  four  provinces  above  mentioned,  shall 
be  brought  before  the  Court  of  Appeal  in  Bangkok.” 

(l.  s.)  Phya  Suriya. 

(l.  s.)  G.  Tornielli. 


56 


Portugal, 

1859. 

(Treaty  of  Friendship,  Commerce,  and  Navigation, 
between  Portugal  and  Siam. — Signed  at  Bangkok, 
February  10,  1859.) 

(Ratification  exchanged  at  Bangkok,  August  28,  1861.) 

(Translation.) 

VI.  “Any  questions  which  may  arise  between  Portu- 
guese and  Siamese  subjects  must  be  laid  before  the 
Portuguese  Consul,  who,  in  concert  and  agreement  with 
the  Siamese  authorities,  will  endeavour  to  settle  it 
amicably ; and  in  case  of  not  being  able  to  do  so,  civil 
questions  will  be  decided  by  the  Consul  or  by  the  Siamese 
authority,  according  to  the  nationality  of  the  delinquent 
or  accused  person,  and  in  conformity  with  the  respective 
laws. 

“The  Consul  will  never  interfere  in  questions  which 
solely  concern  Siamese  subjects,  nor  the  Siamese  authori- 
ties in  questions  solely  relating  to  Portuguese  subjects, 
except  in  the  case  of  crimes  in  which  the  delinquents  will 
be  taken  into  custody  by  the  local  authority  and  handed 
over  to  the  Portuguese  Consul  to  be  punished  according 
to  the  Portuguese  laws,  or  sent  to  Macao  to  be  tried 
there.  In  any  question  in  which  Portuguese  or  Siamese 
subjects  are  interested,  the  Portuguese  Consul,  as  well 
as  the  Siamese  authorities  will  have  the  right  to  be 
present  at  the  investigations  which  are  made  for  the 
elucidation  of  the  case,  having  a right  to  receive  whenever 
it  is  possible,  copies  of  the  depositions  and  other  docu- 
ments relating  to  the  trial  till  the  conclusion  of  the  case.” 


57 


Japan, 

1898. 

(Treaty  of  Friendship,  Commerce,  and  Navigation, 
between  Japan  and  Siam. — Signed  at  Bangkok,  Feb- 
ruary 25,  1898.) 

Protocol : 

“1.  The  Siamese  Government  consent  that  Japanese 
Consular  officers  shall  exercise  jurisdiction  over  Japanese 
subjects  in  Siam  until  the  judicial  reforms  of  Siam  shall 
have  been  completed,  that  is,  until  a Criminal  Code,  a 
Code  of  Criminal  Procedure,  a Civil  Code  (with  exception 
of  Law  of  Marriage  and  Succession),  a Code  of  Civil 
Procedure,  and  a Law  of  Constitution  of  the  Courts  of 
Justice  will  come  into  force.” 


58 


Russia, 

1899. 

(Declaration  between  Russia  and  Siam  relative  to 
Commerce  and  Navigation,  &c. — Signed  at  Bangkok, 
June  11/23,  1899.) 

“Que  pour  tout  ce  qui  a rapport  £ la  juridiction,  au 
commerce,  et  & la  navigation  les  sujets  Siamois  sur  le 
territoire  de  la  Russie  et  les  sujets  Russes  sur  le  territoire 
du  Siam  jouiront  dorenavant,  jusqu’it  l’expiration  du 
present  Arrangement,  de  tous  les  droits  et  privileges 
accordes  aux  sujets  des  autres  nations,  respectivement 
au  Siam  ou  en  Russie,  par  les  Traites  actuellement  en 
vigueur,  ainsi  que  par  les  Trails  qui  pourront  etre  con- 
tractus dans  l’avenir.” 


59 


Denmark, 

1858. 

(Treaty  of  Friendship,  Commerce,  and  Navigation, 
between  Denmark  and  Siam. — Signed  at  Bangkok, 
May  21,  1858.) 

(Ratifications  exchanged  at  Bangkok,  September  15, 

1859. ) 

“X.  Should  a Danish  subject  be  charged  with  any 
grave  crime  in  the  Kingdom  of  Siam,  he  shall  be  arrested 
by  the  local  authorities  and  be  punished  by  the  Consul 
according  to  the  laws  of  Denmark,  or  be  transmitted  by 
him  to  Denmark,  to  receive  punishment  on  being  found 
guilty.  Should  a Danish  subject  commit  any  minor  of- 
fence or  misdemeanour  in  Siam,  he  shall  in  like  manner 
be  arrested  by  the  Siamese  authorities,  and,  on  proof  of 
his  guilt,  the  Consul  will  punish  him,  either  by  deporta- 
tion or  pecuniary  mulct.  If  a Siamese  be  guilty  of  any 
crime  or  offence  against  a Danish  subject,  the  offender 
shall  be  arrested  by  the  local  authorities,  and  made  over 
to  the  severity  of  the  laws  of  the  kingdom.” 

1905. 

(Convention  retween  Denmark  and  Siam  concern- 
ing the  Registration  of  and  Jurisdiction  over  Danish 
Subjects  in  Siam. — Signed  at  Bangkok,  March  24, 
1905.) 

(Ratifications  exchanged  at  Bangkok,  May  18,  1905.) 

“VI.  With  regard  to  the  jurisdiction  to  which  in  the 
future  without  any  exception  all  Danish  subjects  in  Siam 
will  be  subjected,  the  two  Governments  agree: 


60 


“(a)-l.  In  criminal  matters  if  the  offender  be  a Dan- 
ish subject,  he  shall  be  tried  and  punished  by  the  Danish 
Consular  officer. 

“2.  In  civil  matters  all  actions  brought  by  a Siamese 
against  a Danish  subject  shall  be  heard  before  the  Dan- 
ish Consular  Court.  If  the  defendant  is  a Siamese,  the 
action  shall  be  heard  by  the  Siamese  Court  for  Foreign 
Causes. 

“(b)-l.  But  all  civil  or  criminal  cases  arising  in  the 
Provinces  of  Chiengmai,  Laldion,  Lampoon,  Pray,  and 
Nan,  brought  or  instituted  either  by  the  Siamese  Govern- 
ment or  by  Siamese  or  Foreign  subjects,  in  which  a Dan- 
ish subject  may  be  a defendant,  and  likewise  all  civil  and 
criminal  cases  in  which  a Danish  subject  may  be  the  plain- 
tiff or  complainant,  the  defendant  being  a person  under 
Siamese  jurisdiction,  shall  be  heard  before  the  Siamese 
International  Court. 

“2.  In  any  of  the  cases  mentioned  in  the  last  preced- 
ing paragraph,  the  Danish  Consul  shall  have  the  right  to 
be  present  at  the  trial  or  to  be  represented  there  by  a duly 
authorized  delegate,  and  to  make  any  observations  whicn 
he  may  deem  proper  in  the  interest  of  justice. 

“3.  In  cases  where  the  defendant  is  a Danish  sub- 
ject, the  Danish  Consul,  may,  at  any  stage  of  the  proceed- 
ings, if  he  thinks  proper,  by  means  of  a written  requisition 
evoke  the  case  before  him.  Such  case  shall  be  transferred 
to  the  Danish  Consular  Court,  which  shall  from  that 
time  alone  be  competent  to  try  the  case,  and  to  which  the 
Siamese  authorities  shall  be  bound  to  give  their  assist- 
ance.” 

(l.  s.)  Devawongse  Varoprakar. 
(l.  s.)  A.  E.  Olarovsky. 


61 


1913. 

(Treaty  between  Denmark  and  Siam  defining  the 
Jurisdiction  to  be  Exercised  over  Danish  Subjects  in 
Siam. — Copenhagen,  March  15,  1913.) 

(Ratifications  exchanged  at  Bangkok,  July  12,  1913.) 

Arts.  I to  VII  inclusive  : 

“Art.  I.  The  jurisdiction  hitherto  exercised  in  Siam  by 
the  Danish  Consul  or  the  Danish  Consular  Court  is 
hereby  transferred  to  the  Siamese  Government  in  accord- 
ance with  the  provisions  of  the  following  Articles : — 

“II.  In  regard  to  the  trial  of  cases,  the  two  Govern- 
ments have  agreed  to  substitute  the  following  in  place 
of  the  provisions  contained  in  the  Convention  of  the  24th 
March,  1905 : — 

“All  Danish  subjects  in  Siam  shall  hereafter  be  sub- 
ject to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  ordinary  Siamese  Courts: 
provided  that  all  Danish  subjects  registered  at  the  Dau- 
ish  Consulate  before  the  date  of  the  ratification  of  this 
Treaty  shall  be  subject  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Siamese 
International  Courts  under  the  conditions  hereinafter 
defined. 

“III.  The  jurisdiction  of  the  International  Courts 
shall  extend: — 

“1.  In  civil  matters : to  all  civil  and  commercial  mat- 
ters to  which  Danish  subjects  shall  be  parties. 

“2.  In  penal  matters : to  all  branches  of  law  of  every 
kind,  whether  committed  by  Danish  subjects  or  to  their 
injury. 


62 


“IV.  In  cases  in  the  International  Courts  where  the 
defendant  or  accused  is  a Danish  subject  the  Danish  Con- 
sul may,  at  any  time  before  judgment  in  the  Court  of 
First  Instance,  by  means  of  a written  requisition,  evoke 
the  case,  if  he  shall  think  proper  in  the  interests  of  jus- 
tice. 

“Such  cases  shall  then  be  transferred  for  adjudica- 
tion to  the  Danish  Consul,  who  from  this  moment  shall 
alone  be  competent  and  to  whom  the  Siamese  authorities 
shall  be  bound  to  give  their  assistance. 

“The  right  of  evocation  in  the  International  Courts 
shall  cease  to  be  exercised  in  all  matters  coming  within 
the  scope  of  codes  or  laws  regularly  promulgated,  as  soon 
as  the  text  of  such  codes  or  laws  shall  have  been  communi- 
cated to  the  Danish  Diplomatic  Representative  at  Bang- 
kok. There  shall  be  an  understanding  between  the  Siamese 
Minister  for  Foreign  Affairs  and  the  Danish  Diplomatic 
Representative  at  Bangkok  for  the  disposal  of  cases  pend- 
ing at  the  time  that  the  said  codes  and  laws  are  com- 
municated. 

“V.  Appeals  against  the  decisions  of  the  International 
Courts  of  First  Instance  shall  be  adjudged  by  the  Siamese 
Court  of  Appeals  at  Bangkok. 

“Notice  of  all  such  appeals  shall  be  communicated  to 
the  Danish  Consul,  who  shall  have  the  right  to  give  a 
written  opinion  upon  the  case  to  be  annexed  to  the  record. 

“An  appeal  on  a question  of  law  shall  lie  from  the 
Court  of  Appeal  at  Bangkok  to  the  Supreme  or  Dika 
Court, 

“VI.  The  system  of  International  Courts  shall  come 
to  an  end,  and  the  jurisdiction  of  those  Courts  shall  be 


63 


transferred  to  the  ordinary  Siamese  Courts  after  the  pro- 
mulgation and  the  coming  into  force  of  all  of  the  follow- 
ing Siamese  Codes,  namely,  the  Penal  Code,  the  Civil  and 
Commercial  Codes,  the  Codes  of  Procedure,  and  the  law 
for  the  Organization  of  Courts. 

% 

“VII.  In  all  cases  brought  before  the  ordinary  Siamese 
Courts,  as  well  as  before  the  International  Courts,  Dan- 
ish subjects  shall  enjoy,  on  similar  conditions,  equal 
rights  and  advantages  with  those  which  the  Siamese  Gov- 
ernment has  already  granted  or  which  it  may  grant  to  the 
citizens  or  subjects  of  any  other  nation. 

“The  benefit  of  the  treatment  of  the  most  favored  na- 
tion is,  at  the  present  moment,  particularly  extended : — 

“1.  To  the  right  of  the  defendant  or  accused  in  any 
case  arising  in  the  provinces  to  apply  for  a change  of 
venue  to  Bangkok. 

“2.  To  the  sitting  of  European  legal  advisers,  either 
in  the  capacity  of  advisers  or  in  the  capacity  of  judges, 
in  any  of  the  different  grades  of  Courts  of  either  class.” 


64 


Germany, 

1862. 

(Treaty  of  Amity,  Commerce,  and  Navigation,  be- 
tween the  States  of  the  German  Customs  and  Com- 
mercial Union  and  the  Grand  Duchies  of  Mecklen- 
burg-Schwerin  and  Mecklenburg-Strelitz,  on  the  one 
part  ; and  Siam,  on  the  other  part. — Signed  at  Bang- 
kok, February  7,  1862.*) 

Art.  X: 

“X.  If  a crime  or  an  offence  be  committed  in  Siam,  and 
the  offender  be  a subject  of  one  of  the  Contracting  Ger- 
man States,  he  shall  be  punished  by  the  Consular  officer 
in  conformity  to  the  respective  German  laws,  or  be  sent 
to  Germany  for  punishment.  If  the  offender  be  a Siamese, 
he  shall  be  punished  by  the  Siamese  authorities  accord- 
ing to  the  laws  of  the  country.” 


^Signed  also  in  the  German  and  Siamese  languages. 


65 


Other  Countries. 

The  same  provisions  for  jurisdiction  over  their 
nationals  as  that  contained  in  the  German  Treaty  of  1862 
are  contained  in  the  Treaties  of  the  following  Powers : 

Belgium,  August  29,  1868; 

The  Netherlands,  December  17,  1860; 

Sweden  and  Norway,  May  18,  1868; 

Spain,  February  23,  1870; 

Austria,  May  17,  1869. 


66 


II. 

TAXATION. 

Great  Britain. 

1826. 

(Treaty  with  the  King  of  Siam,  June  20,  1826.) 
Art.  VI : 

“Merchants  subject  to  the  Siamese  or  English,  going 
to  trade  either  in  Bengal,  or  any  other  Country  subject 
to  the  English,  or  at  Bangkok,  or  in  any  Country  subject 
to  the  Siamese,  must  pay  the  duties  upon  commerce 
according  to  the  customs  of  the  place  or  Country,  on 
either  side;  and  such  merchants  and  the  inhabitants  of 
the  Country  shall  be  allowed  to  buy  and  sell  without 
the  intervention  of  other  persons  in  such  Countries.” 

1855. 

(Treaty  of  Friendship  and  Commerce  between 
Great  Britain  and  Siam. — Signed  at  Bangkok,  April 
18,  1855.) 

(Ratifications  exchanged  at  Bangkok,  April  5, 
1856.) 

“VIII.  The  measurement  duty  hitherto  paid  by  Brit- 
ish vessels  trading  to  Bangkok,  under  the  Treaty  of  1826, 
shall  be  abolished  from  the  date  of  this  Treaty  coming 
into  operation,  and  British  shipping  and  trade  will 
thenceforth  be  only  subject  to  the  payment  of  import  and 
export  duties  on  the  goods  landed  or  shipped.  On  all 
articles  of  import  the  duties  shall  be  3 per  cent,  payable 


67 


at  the  option  of  the  importer,  either  in  kind  or  money, 
calculated  upon  the  market  value  of  the  goods.  Draw- 
back of  the  full  amount  of  duty  shall  be  allowed  upon 
goods  found  unsaleable  and  re-exported.  Should  the 
British  merchant  and  the  Custom-House  officers  disagree 
as  to  the  value  to  be  set  upon  imported  articles,  such 
disputes  shall  be  referred  to  the  Consul  and  proper 
Siamese  officer,  who  shall  each  have  the  power  to  call  in 
an  equal  number  of  merchants  as  assessors,  not  exceed- 
ing 2 on  either  side,  to  assist  them  in  coming  to  an 
equitable  decision. 

“Opium  may  be  imported  free  of  duty,  but  can  only 
be  sold  to  the  opium  farmer  or  his  agents.  In  the  event 
of  no  arrangement  being  effected  with  them  for  the  sale 
of  the  opium,  it  shall  be  re-exported,  and  no  impost  or 
duty  shall  be  levied  thereon.  Any  infringement  of  this 
regulation  shall  subject  the  opium  to  seizure  and  con- 
fiscation. 

“Articles  of  export,  from  the  time  of  production  to 
the  date  of  shipment  shall  pay  1 impost  only,  whether 
this  be  levied  under  the  name  of  inland  tax,  transit  duty, 
or  duty  on  exportation.  The  tax  or  duty  to  be  paid  on 
each  article  of  Siamese  produce  previous  to  or  upon 
exportation,  is  specified  in  the  Tariff  attached  to  this 
Treaty ; and  it  is  distinctly  agreed  that  goods  or  produce 
which  pay  any  description  of  tax  in  the  interior,  shall 
be  exempted  from  any  further  payment  of  duty  on 
exportation. 

******* 

“Bullion,  or  personal  effects,  may  be  imported  or  ex- 
ported free  of  charge.” 


68 


1883. 

(Agreement  between  Great  Britain  and  Siam,  for 

REGULATING  THE  TRAFFIC  IN  SPIRITUOUS  LIQUORS. — 

Signed  at  London,  April  6,  1883. ) 

Art.  I : 

“Art.  I.  Spirits  of  all  kinds  not  exceeding  in  alcoholic 
strength  those  permitted  to  be  manufactured  by  the  Siam- 
ese Government  in  Siam  may  be  imported  and  sold  by 
British  subjects  on  payment  of  the  same  duty  as  that 
levied  by  the  Siamese  excise  laws  upon  spirits  manufac- 
tured in  Siam ; and  spirits  exceeding  in  alcoholic  strength 
spirits  manufactured  in  Siam  as  aforesaid  may  be  im- 
ported and  sold  upon  payment  of  such  duty  and  of  a pro- 
portionate additional  duty  for  the  excess  of  alcoholic 
strength  above  the  Siamese  Government  standard. 

“Beer  and  wines  may  be  imported  and  sold  by  British 
subjects  on  payment  of  the  same  duty  as  that  levied  by 
the  Siamese  excise  laws  upon  similar  articles  manufac- 
tured in  Siam,  but  the  duty  on  imported  beer  and  wines 
shall  in  no  case  exceed  10  per  cent,  ad  valorem. 

“The  said  duty  on  imported  spirits,  beer  and  wines 
shall  be  in  substitution  of,  and  not  in  addition  to,  the  im- 
port duty  of  3 per  cent,  leviable  under  the  existing  Treat- 
ies ; and  no  further  duty,  tax,  or  imposition  whatever  shall 
be  imposed  on  imported  spirits,  beer,  and  wines. 

“The  scale  of  excise  duty  to  be  levied  upon  spirits,  beer, 
and  wines  manufactured  in  Siam  shall  be  communicated 
by  the  Siamese  Government  to  Her  Majesty’s  Agent  and 
Consul-Agent  at  Bangkok,  and  no  change  in  the  excise 
duties  shall  affect  British  subjects  until  after  the  expira- 
tion of  six  months  from  the  date  at  which  such  notice 
shall  have  been  communicated  by  the  Siamese  Govern- 
ment to  Her  Majesty’s  Representative  at  Bangkok.” 


69 


France, 

1856. 

( Decret  Imperial  portant  promulgation  du  Traite 

DE  L’AMITlfi,  DE  COMMERCE  ET  DE  NAVIGATION,  CONCLUE 
LE  15  AotT,  1856,  ENTRE  LA  FRANCE  ET  LE  SlAM. — PARIS, 
le  28  Decembre,  1857.) 

“XVII.  Moyenant  Pacquittement  des  droits  d’im- 
portation  et  d’exportation  mentionnes  ci-apres,  les 
navires  Frangais  et  leurs  cargaisons  seront  affranchis, 
dans  les  ports  Siamois,  de  toutes  taxes  de  tonnage,  de 
licence  de  pilotage,  d’ancrage  et  de  tonte  autre  taxe 
quelconque,  soit  k Pentree,  soit  k la  sortie.  Les  navires 
Frangais  jouiront  de  tous  les  privileges  et  immunities  qui 
sont  ou  seront  accordes  aux  jonques  et  na\ires  Siamois 
eux-memes,  ainsi  qu’aux  navires  des  nations  etrangeres 
les  plus  favorisees. 

“XVIII.  Le  droit  it  percevoir  sur  les  marchandises 
import6es  par  navires  Frangais  dans  le  Royaume  de  Siam 
n’excedera  point  trois  pour  cent  de  la  valeur.  II  sera 
payable  en  nature  ou  en  argent,  au  choix  de  l'importa- 
teur.  Si  ce  dernier  ne  peut  tornber  d’accord  avec 
l’employ6  Siamois  sur  la  valeur  h attribuer  ii  la  marchan- 
dise  importee,  il  devra  en  etre  refere  au  Consul  de  France 
et  au  fonctionnaire  Siamois  competent,  lesquels,  apres 
s’etre  adjoint  chaeun  un  ou  deux  negociants  comme 
assesseurs,  s’ils  le  jugent  necessaire,  regleront  Pobjet  de 
la  contestation  suivant  l’equite. 

“Apres  le  payement  du  droit  d'entree  de  trois  pour 
cent,  les  marchandises  pourront  etre  vendues  en  gros  ou 
en  detail,  sans  avoir  k supporter  aucune  charge  ou 


70 


surtaxe  quelconque.  Si  des  marchandises  debarquees  ne 
pouvaient  etre  vendues  et  ^talent  r£export6es,  la  totality 
du  droit  paye  par  elles  serait  remboursee  h leur  propri6- 
taire.  II  ne  sera  exige  aucun  droit  sur  la  partie  de  la 
eargaison  qui  ne  sera  point  debarquee. 

“XIX.  Les  droits  h percevoir  sur  les  marchandises 
d'origine  Siamoise,  soit,  avant  leur  exportation  sur  les 
navires  Frangais,  soit  au  moment  de  cette  exportation, 
seront  regies  eonformement  au  tarif  annexe  au  present 
Traite  sous  le  sceau  et  la  signature  des  Plenipotentiaires 
respectifs.  Les  produits  soumis  par  ce  tarif  h des  droits 
d’exportation  seront  affranchis  de  tout  droit  de  transit 
ou  autre  dans  l’interieur  du  Royaume,  et  tout  produit 
Siamois  qui  aura  dejh  acquitte  une  taxe  interieure  ou 
de  transit  n’aura  plus  h supporter  aucune  taxe  quel- 
conque, soit  avant,  soit  au  moment  d’etre  mis  h bord  d’un 
navire  Frangais. 

“XX.  Moyennant  l'acquittement  des  droits  ci-dessus 
mentionn£s,  et  dont  il  est  expressement  interdit  d’aug- 
menter  le  montant  a l’avenir,  les  Frangais  seront  libres 
d’importer  dans  le  Royaume  de  Siam,  des  ports  Frangais 
et  etrangers,  et  d'exporter  egalement,  pour  toute  destina- 
tion, toutes  les  marchandises  qui  ne  seront  pas,  au  jour 
de  la  signature  du  present  Traite,  l’objet  d’une  prohibi- 
tion formelle  ou  d’un  monopole  special.” 


71 


1867. 

(Convention  extre  la  France  et  le  Royaume  de 
Siam,  relatiyement  a l'Importation  des  Yins  et 
Spiritueux  dans  le  Royaume  de  Siam. — Conclue  a 
Paris,  le  7 AoCt,  1867.) 

(Ratifications  echangees  a Bangkok,  le  24  Xovembre, 
1867.) 

“Art.  I.  Les  sujets  Frangais  pourront,  moyennant 
l’acquittement  cTun  droit  d'entree  de  3 pour  cent  de  la 
valeur,  importer  dans  le  Royaume  de  Siam,  de  quelque 
pays  et  sous  quelque  pavilion  que  ce  soit,  des  vins  et 
autres  boissons  fermentees,  ainsi  que  toute  espece  de 
boissons  distillees.'’ 


1883. 

(Arrangement  entre  la  France  et  le  Royaume  de 
Siam,  relativement  a l’Importation  et  a la  Vente  des 
Boissons  en  Siam. — Signs  A Paris,  le  23  Mai,  1883. ) 

(Ratifications  echangees  & Paris,  le  12  Aout,  1885). 
Art.  I : 

“Les  ressortissants  Frangais  pourront  importer  dans 
le  Royaume  de  Siam,  de  quelque  pays  et  sous  quelque 
pavilion  que  ce  soit,  des  boissons  fermentees,  ainsi  que 
toute  espece  de  boissons  distillees  dont  le  titre  alcolique 
ne  sera  pas  superieur  & 50  degr£s,  mesures  h l’alcoom^tre 
de  Gay-Lussac,  moyennant  l’acquittement  d’un  droit 
d’entree  qui  ne  pourra  etre  plus  61eve  que  les  droits  in- 
terieurs  qui  grevent  les  boissons  fermentees  ou  distillees 
d’origine  Siamoise. 


72 


“Ils  pourront  6galement  importer  les  spiritueux  d’un 
titre  sup£rieur  & 50  degr6s ; mais  ces  boissons,  tant  qu’il 
ne  sera  pas  fabrique  k Siam  de  spiritueux  du  meme  titre, 
pourront  etre  soumises  & un  droit  additionel  etabli  pro- 
portionnellement  d'apres  le  base  adoptee  pour  les  spir- 
itueux d'un  titre  inferieur. 

“En  ce  qui  concerne  les  vins,  le  droit  d’entrSe  ne 
pourra,  dans  tous  les  cas,  exc6der  8 pour  cent  de  la 
valeur.” 


73 


United  States, 

1833. 

(Treaty  of  Amity  and  Commerce  between  the 
United  States  and  Siam. — Signed  at  Sia-Yut’hia 
(Bangkok),  20th  March,  1833.) 

(A  Proclamation. — By  the  President  of  The  United 
States  of  America.) 

Art.  Ill: 

“Vessels  of  the  United  States  entering  any  Port  within 
His  Majesty’s  Dominions,  and  selling  or  purchasing  Car- 
goes of  merchandise,  shall  pay,  in  lieu  of  import  and  ex- 
port duties,  tonnage,  license  to  trade,  or  any  other  charge 
whatever,  a measurement  duty  only,  as  follows : The  meas- 
urement shall  be  made  from  side  to  side,  in  the  middle  of 
the  Vessel’s  length ; and,  if  a single-decked  Vessel,  on  such 
single  deck;  if  otherwise,  on  the  lower  deck.  On  every 
Vessel  selling  merchandise,  the  sum  of  1,700  Ticals,  or 
Bats,  shall  be  paid  for  every  Siamese  fathom  in  breadth, 
so  measured;  the  said  fathom  being  computed  to  contain 
78  English  or  American  inches,  corresponding  to  96  Siam- 
ese inches;  but  if  the  Vessel  should  come  without  mer- 
chandise, and  purchase  a Cargo  with  specie  only,  she  shall 
then  pay  the  sum  of  1,500  Ticals,  or  Bats,  for  each  and 
every  fathom  before  described.  Furthermore,  neither  the 
aforesaid  measurement  duty,  nor  any  other  charge  what- 
ever, shall  be  paid  by  any  Vessel  of  The  United  States 
that  enters  a Siamese  Port  for  the  purpose  of  refitting,  or 
for  refreshments,  or  to  inquire  the  state  of  the  market. 

“IV.  If  hereafter  the  Duties  payable  by  Foreign  Ves- 
sels be  diminished  in  favour  of  any  other  Nation,  the  same 


74 


diminution  shall  be  made  in  favour  of  the  Vessels  of  The 
United  States.” 


1856. 

(Treaty  of  Peace,  Friendship,  Commerce  and  Navi- 
gation, between  The  United  States  and  Siam. — 
Signed  at  Bangkok,  May  29,  1856.) 

Art.  VII: 

“The  measurement  duty  hitherto  paid  by  American 
vessels  trading  to  Bangkok  under  the  Treaty  of  1833  shall 
be  abolished  from  the  date  of  this  Treaty  coming  into 
operation,  and  American  shipping  or  trade  will  thence- 
forth only  be  subject  to  the  payment  of  import  and  export 
duties  on  the  goods  landed  or  shipped. 

“On  the  articles  of  import  the  duty  shall  be  3 per  cent., 
payable,  at  the  option  of  the  importer,  either  in  kind 
or  money,  calculated  upon  the  market  value  of  the  goods. 
Drawback  of  the  full  amount  of  duty  shall  be  allowed 
upon  goods  found  unsaleable  and  re-exported.  Should 
the  American  merchant  and  the  Custom-House  officers 
disagree  as  to  the  value  to  be  set  upon  imported  articles, 
such  disputes  shall  be  referred  to  the  Consul  and  a proper 
Siamese  officer,  who  shall  each  have  the  power  to  call  in 
an  equal  number  of  merchants  as  assessors,  not  exceed- 
ing 2 on  either  side,  to  assist  them  in  coming  to  an  equit- 
able decision. 

“Opium  may  be  imported  free  of  duty,  but  can  only  be 
sold  to  the  opium  farmer  or  his  agents.  In  the  event  of 
no  arrangement  being  effected  with  them  for  the  sale  of 
the  opium,  it  shall  be  re-exported,  and  no  impost  or  duty 
(shall  be)  levied  thereon.  Any  infringement  of  this 


75 


regulation  shall  subject  the  opium  to  seizure  and  confisca- 
tion. 

“Articles  of  export,  from  the  time  of  production  to 
the  date  of  shipment,  shall  pay  one  impost  only,  whether 
this  be  levied  under  the  name  of  inland  tax,  transit  duty, 
or  duty  on  exportation.  The  tax  or  duty  to  be  paid  on 
each  article  of  Siamese  produce  previous  to  or  upon  ex- 
portation is  specified  in  the  tariff  attached  to  this  Treaty ; 
and  it  is  distinctly  agreed  that  goods  or  produce  that  pay 
any  description  of  tax  in  the  interior  shall  be  exempted 
from  any  further  payment  of  duty  on  exportation.  Amer- 
ican merchants  are  to  be  allowed  to  purchase  directly 
from  the  producer  the  articles  in  which  they  trade,  and 
in  like  manner  to  sell  their  goods  directly  to  the  parties 
wishing  to  purchase  the  same  without  the  interference  in 
either  case  of  any  other  person. 

“The  rates  of  duty  laid  down  in  the  tariff  attached  to 
this  Treaty  are  those  that  are  now  paid  upon  goods  or 
produce  shipped  in  Siamese  or  Chinese  vessels  or  junks; 
and  it  is  agreed  that  American  shipping  shall  enjoy  all 
the  privileges  now  exercised  by,  or  which  hereafter  may 
be  granted  to,  Siamese  or  Chinese  vessels  or  junks. 
*##*#*# 

“Bullion  or  personal  effects  may  be  imported  or  ex- 
ported free  of  charge.” 

The  United  States  has  subscribed  to  a Spirituous 
Liquor  Agreement  similar  to  that  with  Great  Britain, 
April  6,  1883. 


76 


Italy, 

1868. 

( Treaty  of  Friendship,  Commerce,  and  Navigation, 
between  Italy  and  Siam. — Signed  in  London,  October 
3,  1868.) 

“On  all  articles  of  importation,  the  duties  shall  be  3 
per  cent,  payable,  at  the  choice  of  the  importer,  in  goods 
or  in  money,  calculated  on  the  mercantile  or  saleable 
value  of  the  goods  in  the  market.  The  whole  of  the  duty 
will  be  returned  on  merchandise  unsold  and  re-exported. 
If  the  Italian  merchant  and  the  Custom-House  officers 
should  not  agree  as  to  the  value  to  be  put  upon  the 
articles  imported,  the  dispute  shall  be  referred  to  the 
Legation  or  to  one  of  the  Italian  Consulates,  and  a com- 
petent Siamese  functionary.  Each  of  them  shall  have  a 
right  to  invite  an  equal  number  of  merchants  as  assessors, 
not  more  than  two  on  each  side,  in  order  to  assist  them 
to  come  to  a just  decision. 

“Opium  may  be  imported  free  of  duty,  but  can  only 
be  sold  to  the  opium  farmer  and  his  representatives;  if 
no  agreement  can  be  made  with  them  for  the  sale  of  the 
opium,  it  shall  be  re-exported,  and  no  duty  shall  be  levied 
on  that  account.” 

******* 

“Articles  for  exportation,  from  the  time  of  production 
to  the  date  of  loading,  shall  pay  but  one  impost,  whether 
it  be  levied  under  the  name  of  inland  tax,  transit  duty, 
or  export  duty.  The  tax  or  duty  to  be  paid  on  each 
article  of  Siamese  produce,  before  or  at  the  time  of  the 


77 


exportation,  is  specified  in  the  tariff  annexed  to  the  pres- 
ent Treaty;  and  it  is  understood  that  the  goods  or  pro- 
duce which  pay  any  kind  of  tax  in  the  interior  shall  be 
exempt  from  any  other  payment  of  export  duties.  Italian 
merchants  shall  be  at  liberty  to  obtain  the  articles  of 
their  commerce  direct  from  the  producer,  and  to  sell  their 
own  goods  direct  to  whom  they  please,  and  also  to  buy 
them  without  the  intervention  of  any  other  person  in 
either  case. 

“If  there  should  be  articles  of  exportation  not  in- 
cluded in  the  tariff  of  duties,  upon  which  the  Siamese 
Government  may  consider  it  expedient  to  impose  a tax 
or  duty,  the  said  Government  shall  be  free  to  levy  such 
tax  or  duty,  provided  that  it  be  just  and  reasonable.” 

Italy  has  subscribed  to  a Spirituous  Liquor  Agreement 
similar  to  that  with  Great  Britain,  April  6,  1883. 


78 


Portugal, 

1859. 

(Treaty  of  Friendship,  Commerce,  and  Navigation, 
between  Portugal  and  Siam. — Signed  at  Bangkok, 
February  10,  1859.) 

“XXV.  The  import  duties  payable  on  foreign  mer- 
chandize in  the  ports  of  the  Kingdom  of  Siam  by  Portu- 
guese ships  will  never  exceed  3 per  cent,  of  the  value, 
which  will  be  paid  either  in  money  or  in  goods  at  the 
choice  of  the  importer.  In  case  of  disagreement  between 
the  importer  and  the  Siamese  officials  as  to  the  value  at 
which  the  merchandize  should  be  assessed,  the  question 
will  be  submitted  for  the  decision  of  the  Consul  and  of 
the  competent  Siamese  functionary,  who  may  each  name 
two  merchants  as  arbitrators  if  they  consider  it  desirable 
to  do  so.  After  payment  of  the  said  duty  of  3 per  cent, 
the  imported  merchandize  may  be  sold  in  any  part  of  the 
Kingdom  of  Siam  wholesale  or  retail,  without  being  sub- 
ject to  any  further  payment  of  duty.  Merchandize  which 
is  not  disembarked  will  pay  no  duty,  and  the  importer 
will  be  repaid  any  duty  which  he  may  have  paid  on  mer- 
chandize which  he  re-exports. 

“XXVI.  The  duties  to  be  levied  on  merchandize  of 
Siamese  production,  either  before  its  exportation  in 
Portuguese  ships  or  at  the  time  of  exportation,  will  be 
regulated  by  the  Tariff  annexed  to  this  present  Treaty, 
signed  and  sealed  by  the  respective  Plenipotentiaries. 
The  articles  of  produce  which  are  subject  to  payment  of 
the  duties  indicated  in  the  said  Tariff,  will,  by  this  fact, 


79 


be  freed  from  any  transit  or  other  dues  which  they  would 
otherwise  be  subject  to  in  the  interior  of  the  kingdom. 
In  the  same  way,  any  Siamese  produce  which  may  have 
paid  any  interior  tax  or  transit  due  will  not  be  subject  to 
further  duties,  before  or  at  the  time  of  shipment  on  any 
Portuguese  vessel.” 

Portugal  has  subscribed  to  a Spirituous  Liquor  Agree- 
ment similar  to  that  with  Great  Britain,  April  6,  1883. 


80 


Japan, 

1898. 

( Treaty  of  Friendship,  Commerce,  and  Navigation, 
between  Japan  and  Siam. — Signed  at  Bangkok,  Feb- 
ruary 25,  1898.) 

(Ratifications  exchanged  at  Bangkok,  May  31,  1898). 
Art.  V-VIII : 

“V.  The  subjects  of  eacli  of  the  High  Contracting  Par- 
ties shall  enjoy  in  the  dominions  and  possessions  of  the 
other  a perfect  equality  of  treatment  with  the  subjects 
or  citizens  of  the  most  favoured  nation  in  all  that  relates 
to  transit  duties,  warehousing,  bounties,  facilities,  the 
examination  and  appraisement  of  merchandise  and  draw- 
backs. 

“VI.  No  other  or  higher  duties  shall  be  imposed  on 
the  importation  into  the  dominions  and  possessions  of 
His  Majesty  the  King  of  Siam  of  any  article  the  produce 
or  manufacture  of  the  dominions  and  possessions  of  His 
Majesty  the  Emperor  of  Japan,  from  whatever  place  ar- 
riving, and  no  other  or  higher  duties  shall  be  imposed 
on  the  importation  into  the  dominions  and  possessions 
of  His  Majesty  the  Emperor  of  Japan  of  any  article  the 
produce  or  manufacture  of  the  dominions  and  possessions 
of  His  Majesty  the  King  of  Siam,  from  whatever  place  ar- 
riving, than  on  the  like  article  produced  or  manufactured 
in  any  other  foreign  country;  nor  shall  any  prohibition 
be  maintained  or  imposed  on  the  importation  of  any  ar- 
ticle the  produce  or  manufacture  of  the  dominions  and 


81 


possessions  of  either  of  the  High  Contracting  Parties  into 
the  dominions  and  possessions  of  the  other,  from  what- 
ever place  arriving,  which  shall  not  equally  extend  to 
the  importation  of  the  like  article  being  the  produce  or 
manufacture  of  any  other  country.  This  last  provision 
is  not  applicable  to  the  sanitary  and  other  prohibitions 
occasioned  by  the  necessity  of  protecting  the  safety  of 
persons,  or  of  cattle,  or  of  plants  useful  to  agriculture. 

“VII.  No  other  or  higher  duties,  taxes,  or  charges  of 
any  kind  shall  be  imposed  in  the  dominions  and  posses- 
sions of  either  of  the  High  Contracting  Parties  in  respect 
of  any  article  exported  to  the  dominions  and  possessions 
of  the  other  than  such  as  are  or  may  be  payable  in  respect 
of  the  like  article  exported  to  any  other  foreign  country ; 
nor  shall  any  prohibition  be  imposed  on  the  exportation 
of  any  article  from  the  dominions  and  possessions  of  either 
of  the  two  Contracting  Parties  to  the  dominions  and  pos- 
sessions of  the  other  which  shall  not  equally  extend  to  the 
exportation  of  the  like  article  to  any  other  country. 

ayjjj  ****** 

“In  the  same  manner  there  shall  be  perfect  equality 
of  treatment  in  regard  to  exportation,  so  that  the  same  in- 
ternal and  export  duties  shall  be  paid,  and  the  same 
bounties  and  drawbacks  allowed,  in  the  dominions  and 
possessions  of  either  of  the  High  Contracting  Parties  on 
the  exportation  of  any  article  which  is  or  may  be  legally 
exported  therefrom,  whether  such  exportation  shall  take 
place  in  Japanese  or  Siamese  vessels  or  in  vessels  of  a 
third  Power,  and  whatever  may  be  the  place  of  destina- 
tion, whether  a port  of  either  of  the  Contracting  Parties 
or  of  any  third  Power.” 


82 


Protocol. 

“2.  The  Japanese  Government  accept  as  binding  upon 
Japanese  subjects  and  vessels  resorting  to  Siam  the  Trade 
Regulations  and  Customs  Tariffs  now  in  force  in  Siam 
in  respect  of  the  subjects,  citizens,  and  vessels  of  the  other 
Powers  having  Treaties  with  Siam. 

“Such  Regulations  and  Tariffs  shall  be  subject  to  re- 
vision at  any  time  upon  twelve  months’  previous  notice, 
on  demand  of  either  Japan  or  Siam.’’ 

1898. 

(Notes.  Traffic  of  Spirituous  Liquors  in  Siam, 
Japanese  Legation,  Bangkok,  February  25, 1898:) 

“February  25, 1898.” 

“M.  Le  Ministre, 

I have  the  honour  to  communicate  to  your  Royal  High- 
ness the  following  proposals,  which  the  Imperial  Govern- 
ment hope  will  be  accepted  by  the  Royal  Government : that 
as  the  Japanese  Government  is  ready  to  give  their  adhe- 
sion to  the  arrangements  concluded  by  Siam  with  the 
several  Treaty  Powers  in  1883,  1884  and  1885  for  the 
regulation  of  the  traffic  in  spirituous  liquors,  and  also  to 
agree  to  the  Laws  of  1887,  designed  to  carry  those  arrange- 
ments into  full  effect,  the  Siamese  Government  on  their 
part  will  engage  that  the  Japanese  subjects  shall  at  all 
times  enjoy  the  same  right  and  privileges  in  regard  to 
the  importation  and  sale  of  spirits,  beer,  wines,  and  spir- 
ituous liquors  in  Siam  as  the  subjects  or  citizens  of  the 
most  favoured  nation;  that  spirits,  beer,  wines,  and  spir- 
ituous liquors  imported  into  Siam  from  Japan  shall  enjoy 


83 


the  same  privileges  in  all  respects  as  similar  articles  im- 
ported from  the  most  favoured  nation ; and  that  the  excep- 
tion contained  in  section  4 of  said  Law  in  favour  of  wine 
and  beer  made  in  Europe  and  in  the  United  States  of 
America  shall  equally  apply  to  wine  and  beer  made  in 
Japan. 

I avail,  &c., 

Manjiro  Inagaki.” 

“To  his  Royal  Highness 

Krom  Luang  Devawongse  Varoprakar, 

H.  R.  S.  M’s  Minister  for  Foreign  Affairs.” 

“Foreign  Office,  Bangkok, 

February  25, 1898.” 

“M.  Le  Ministre, 

I have  the  honour  to  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  your 
note  of  this  day’s  date  relating  to  the  traffic  of  spirituous 
liquors  in  Siam,  and  I am  happy  to  state  that  His  Maj- 
esty’s Government  accept  the  proposals  of  the  Imperial 
Government  of  Japan  as  contained  in  your  note  under 
reply. 

I avail,  &c., 

Devawongse  Varoprakar, 
Minister  for  Foreign  Affairs.” 

“Manjiro  Inagaki,  Esq., 

Minister  Resident  for  Japan.” 


Denmark, 

1858. 

(Treaty  of  Friendship,  Commerce,  and  Navigation, 
between  Denmark  and  Siam. — Signed  at  Bangkok, 
May  21,  1858.) 

(Ratifications  exchanged  at  Bangkok,  September  15, 

1859. ) 

“XVIII.  By  paying  the  duties  of  importation  and  ex- 
portation, as  after  mentioned,  Danish  vessels  and  their 
cargoes  shall  be  free  in  Siamese  ports  of  all  taxes  of 
tonnage,  pilotage,  anchorage,  and  of  any  other  tax  what- 
ever, either  on  their  arrival  or  on  their  departure.  Dan- 
ish vessels  shall  enjoy  all  privileges  and  immunities 
which  are  or  shall  be  granted  to  junks  and  to  Siamese 
vessels  themselves,  as  well  as  to  the  vessels  of  the  most 
favoured  nations. 

“XIX.  The  duties  to  be  levied  on  merchandize  im- 
ported by  Danish  vessels  into  the  Kingdom  of  Siam,  shall 
not  exceed  3 per  cent,  on  their  value.  They  shall  be  paid 
in  kind  or  in  money,  at  the  choice  of  the  importers.  If 
the  importer  cannot  agree  with  the  Siamese  officer  as  to 
the  value  of  the  imported  merchandize,  a reference  shall 
be  made  to  the  Consul  of  Denmark  and  a competent 
Siamese  functionary,  who,  after  having  each  called  in 
for  consultation  one  or  two  merchants  as  advisers,  if 
they  shall  think  it  necessary,  shall  settle  the  difference 
according  to  justice. 

“After  the  payment  of  the  said  import  duty  of  3 per 
cent,  the  merchandize  may  be  sold  by  wholesale  or  retail, 


85 


free  of  any  other  tax  or  charge  whatsoever.  Should  mer- 
chandize be  landed  and  not  sold,  and  be  again  shipped 
for  exportation,  the  whole  of  the  duties  paid  on  them 
shall  be  reimbursed.  No  duty  shall  be  levied  on  any  cargo 
not  sold.  And  no  further  duty,  tax  or  charge  shall  be 
imposed  or  levied  on  such  imported  merchandize  when 
it  has  passed  into  the  hands  of  Siamese  purchasers. 

“XX.  The  duties  to  be  levied  on  Siamese  produce, 
either  before  or  at  the  time  of  shipment,  shall  be  accord- 
ing to  tariff,  annexed  to  the  present  Treaty.  Every  arti- 
cle of  produce  subject  by  the  tariff  to  duties  of  exporta- 
tion shall  be  free  of  any  duty  of  transit,  or  any  other  duty 
in  any  part  of  the  Kingdom ; and  all  Siamese  produce 
which  shall  have  been  already  taxed  either  for  transit, 
or  for  any  other  cause,  shall  be  no  more  taxed  either 
under  the  tariff  hereto  annexed,  or  in  any  way  whatever 
before  or  at  the  time  of  shipment. 

“The  Siamese  Government  reserves  to  itself  the  right, 
at  any  time  hereafter,  to  impose  a single  tax  or  duty  upon 
any  article  which  is,  or  may  become  a production  of  Siam, 
and  which  is  not  specified  in  the  annexed  tariff,  or  at 
present  subject,  either  directly  or  indirectly,  to  a Gov- 
ernmental charge  of  any  kind,  but  the  Siamese  Govern- 
ment agrees  that  the  said  tax  or  duty,  if  levied  shall  be 
just  and  reasonable.” 

Denmark  has  subscribed  to  a Spirituous  Liquor  Agree- 
ment similar  to  that  with  Great  Britain,  April  6,  1883. 


86 


Germany, 

1862. 

(Treaty  of  Amity,  Commerce,  and  Navigation,  be- 
tween the  States  of  the  German  Customs  and  Com- 
mercial Union  and  the  Grand  Duchies  of  Mecklen- 

BURG-SCHWERIN  AND  MeCKLENBURG-StRELITZ,  ON  THE  ONE 

part;  and  Siam,  on  the  other  part. — Signed  at  Bang- 
kok, February  7,  1862. ) 

Arts.  XVIII— XX : 

“XVIII.  By  paying  the  import  and  export  duties  men- 
tioned hereafter,  vessels  belonging  to  one  of  the  Con- 
tracting German  States,  and  their  cargoes  shall  be  free  in 
Siam  of  all  dues  of  tonnage,  pilotage,  and  anchorage  or 
other  dues  whatsoever,  as  well  on  their  arrival  as  their 
departure.  They  shall  enjoy  all  privileges  and  immunities 
which  are  or  shall  be  granted  to  junks,  Siamese  vessels, 
or  vessels  of  the  most  favoured  nation. 

“XIX.  The  duties  to  be  levied  on  merchandize  im- 
ported into  the  Kingdoms  of  Siam  by  vessels  belonging 
to  any  of  the  Contracting  German  States,  shall  not  ex- 
ceed 3 per  cent,  on  their  value.  They  shall  be  paid  in 
kind  or  in  money  at  the  choice  of  the  importer.  If  the 
importer  cannot  agree  with  the  Siamese  Custom-House 
officers  as  to  the  value  of  the  merchandize  imported,  the 
matter  shall  be  referred  to  the  Consular  officer  and  a 
competent  Siamese  functionary,  who,  if  they  consider  it 
necessary,  will  each  invite  one  or  two  merchants  to  act 
as  advisers,  and  will  settle  the  difference  according  to 
justice. 


87 


“After  payment  of  the  said  import  duty  of  3 per  cent., 
the  merchandize  may  be  sold  by  wholesale  or  retail,  free 
of  any  other  charge  whatsoever.  Should  goods  be  landed 
and  not  sold,  and  be  again  shipped  for  exportation,  the 
whole  of  the  duties  paid  on  them  shall  be  reimbursed; 
and  in  general  no  duty  shall  be  levied  on  any  cargo  not 
sold.  Nor  shall  any  further  duties,  taxes,  or  charges  be 
imposed  or  levied  on  imported  goods,  after  they  have 
passed  into  the  hands  of  Siamese  purchasers. 

“XX.  The  duties  to  be  levied  on  Siamese  produce 
either  before  or  at  the  time  of  shipment,  shall  be  accord- 
ing to  the  tariff  annexed  to  the  present  Treaty.  Every 
article  of  produce  subject  to  duties  of  exportation  accord- 
ing to  this  tariff  shall  be  free  of  all  transit  and  other 
dues  throughout  the  whole  Kingdom  of  Siam;  and  it  is 
likewise  agreed,  that  no  Siamese  produce  which  shall  have 
paid  transit  or  other  dues,  shall  be  subject  to  any  tariff 
duty  or  other  charge  whatsoever,  either  before  or  at  the 
time  of  shipment.” 

The  German  States  have  subscribed  to  a Spirituous 
Liquor  Agreement  similar  to  that  with  Great  Britain, 
April  6,  1883. 


88 


Other  Countries. 

The  same  provisions  for  regulation  of  import  and  ex- 
port duties  as  those  contained  in  the  German  Treaty  of 
1862  are  contained  in  the  Treaties  of  the  following 
Powers : — 

Belgium,  August  29,  1868. 

The  Netherlands,  December  17,  1860. 

Sweden  and  Norway,  May  18,  1868. 

Spain,  February  23,  1870. 

Austria,  May  17,  1869. 

These  Powers  have  also  subscribed  to  a Spirituous 
Liquor  Agreement  similar  to  that  with  Great  Britain, 
April  6,  1883. 


